EP4028916A1 - Système et procédé d'atténuation de menace - Google Patents

Système et procédé d'atténuation de menace

Info

Publication number
EP4028916A1
EP4028916A1 EP20862766.1A EP20862766A EP4028916A1 EP 4028916 A1 EP4028916 A1 EP 4028916A1 EP 20862766 A EP20862766 A EP 20862766A EP 4028916 A1 EP4028916 A1 EP 4028916A1
Authority
EP
European Patent Office
Prior art keywords
security
computing platform
information
relevant
platform
Prior art date
Legal status (The legal status is an assumption and is not a legal conclusion. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation as to the accuracy of the status listed.)
Pending
Application number
EP20862766.1A
Other languages
German (de)
English (en)
Other versions
EP4028916A4 (fr
Inventor
Brian P. Murphy
Joe PARTLOW
Colin O'Connor
Jason PFEIFFER
Brian Philip MURPHY
Current Assignee (The listed assignees may be inaccurate. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation or warranty as to the accuracy of the list.)
Reliaquest Holdings LLC
Original Assignee
Reliaquest Holdings LLC
Priority date (The priority date is an assumption and is not a legal conclusion. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation as to the accuracy of the date listed.)
Filing date
Publication date
Application filed by Reliaquest Holdings LLC filed Critical Reliaquest Holdings LLC
Publication of EP4028916A1 publication Critical patent/EP4028916A1/fr
Publication of EP4028916A4 publication Critical patent/EP4028916A4/fr
Pending legal-status Critical Current

Links

Classifications

    • H—ELECTRICITY
    • H04—ELECTRIC COMMUNICATION TECHNIQUE
    • H04L—TRANSMISSION OF DIGITAL INFORMATION, e.g. TELEGRAPHIC COMMUNICATION
    • H04L63/00—Network architectures or network communication protocols for network security
    • H04L63/14—Network architectures or network communication protocols for network security for detecting or protecting against malicious traffic
    • H04L63/1433—Vulnerability analysis
    • G—PHYSICS
    • G06—COMPUTING; CALCULATING OR COUNTING
    • G06F—ELECTRIC DIGITAL DATA PROCESSING
    • G06F11/00—Error detection; Error correction; Monitoring
    • G06F11/30—Monitoring
    • G06F11/34—Recording or statistical evaluation of computer activity, e.g. of down time, of input/output operation ; Recording or statistical evaluation of user activity, e.g. usability assessment
    • G06F11/3409—Recording or statistical evaluation of computer activity, e.g. of down time, of input/output operation ; Recording or statistical evaluation of user activity, e.g. usability assessment for performance assessment
    • G—PHYSICS
    • G06—COMPUTING; CALCULATING OR COUNTING
    • G06F—ELECTRIC DIGITAL DATA PROCESSING
    • G06F21/00—Security arrangements for protecting computers, components thereof, programs or data against unauthorised activity
    • G06F21/50—Monitoring users, programs or devices to maintain the integrity of platforms, e.g. of processors, firmware or operating systems
    • G06F21/57—Certifying or maintaining trusted computer platforms, e.g. secure boots or power-downs, version controls, system software checks, secure updates or assessing vulnerabilities
    • G06F21/577—Assessing vulnerabilities and evaluating computer system security
    • G—PHYSICS
    • G06—COMPUTING; CALCULATING OR COUNTING
    • G06N—COMPUTING ARRANGEMENTS BASED ON SPECIFIC COMPUTATIONAL MODELS
    • G06N20/00—Machine learning
    • G—PHYSICS
    • G06—COMPUTING; CALCULATING OR COUNTING
    • G06N—COMPUTING ARRANGEMENTS BASED ON SPECIFIC COMPUTATIONAL MODELS
    • G06N5/00—Computing arrangements using knowledge-based models
    • G06N5/04—Inference or reasoning models
    • G—PHYSICS
    • G06—COMPUTING; CALCULATING OR COUNTING
    • G06N—COMPUTING ARRANGEMENTS BASED ON SPECIFIC COMPUTATIONAL MODELS
    • G06N7/00—Computing arrangements based on specific mathematical models
    • G06N7/01—Probabilistic graphical models, e.g. probabilistic networks
    • G—PHYSICS
    • G06—COMPUTING; CALCULATING OR COUNTING
    • G06Q—INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY [ICT] SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES; SYSTEMS OR METHODS SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES, NOT OTHERWISE PROVIDED FOR
    • G06Q10/00—Administration; Management
    • G06Q10/06—Resources, workflows, human or project management; Enterprise or organisation planning; Enterprise or organisation modelling
    • G06Q10/063—Operations research, analysis or management
    • G06Q10/0639—Performance analysis of employees; Performance analysis of enterprise or organisation operations
    • G06Q10/06393—Score-carding, benchmarking or key performance indicator [KPI] analysis
    • H—ELECTRICITY
    • H04—ELECTRIC COMMUNICATION TECHNIQUE
    • H04L—TRANSMISSION OF DIGITAL INFORMATION, e.g. TELEGRAPHIC COMMUNICATION
    • H04L63/00—Network architectures or network communication protocols for network security
    • H04L63/14—Network architectures or network communication protocols for network security for detecting or protecting against malicious traffic
    • H04L63/1408—Network architectures or network communication protocols for network security for detecting or protecting against malicious traffic by monitoring network traffic
    • H04L63/1416—Event detection, e.g. attack signature detection
    • H—ELECTRICITY
    • H04—ELECTRIC COMMUNICATION TECHNIQUE
    • H04L—TRANSMISSION OF DIGITAL INFORMATION, e.g. TELEGRAPHIC COMMUNICATION
    • H04L63/00—Network architectures or network communication protocols for network security
    • H04L63/14—Network architectures or network communication protocols for network security for detecting or protecting against malicious traffic
    • H04L63/1441—Countermeasures against malicious traffic
    • H—ELECTRICITY
    • H04—ELECTRIC COMMUNICATION TECHNIQUE
    • H04L—TRANSMISSION OF DIGITAL INFORMATION, e.g. TELEGRAPHIC COMMUNICATION
    • H04L67/00—Network arrangements or protocols for supporting network services or applications
    • H04L67/2866—Architectures; Arrangements
    • H04L67/30—Profiles
    • H—ELECTRICITY
    • H04—ELECTRIC COMMUNICATION TECHNIQUE
    • H04L—TRANSMISSION OF DIGITAL INFORMATION, e.g. TELEGRAPHIC COMMUNICATION
    • H04L67/00—Network arrangements or protocols for supporting network services or applications
    • H04L67/34—Network arrangements or protocols for supporting network services or applications involving the movement of software or configuration parameters 
    • H—ELECTRICITY
    • H04—ELECTRIC COMMUNICATION TECHNIQUE
    • H04L—TRANSMISSION OF DIGITAL INFORMATION, e.g. TELEGRAPHIC COMMUNICATION
    • H04L67/00—Network arrangements or protocols for supporting network services or applications
    • H04L67/50—Network services
    • H04L67/60—Scheduling or organising the servicing of application requests, e.g. requests for application data transmissions using the analysis and optimisation of the required network resources
    • G—PHYSICS
    • G06—COMPUTING; CALCULATING OR COUNTING
    • G06F—ELECTRIC DIGITAL DATA PROCESSING
    • G06F2221/00—Indexing scheme relating to security arrangements for protecting computers, components thereof, programs or data against unauthorised activity
    • G06F2221/03—Indexing scheme relating to G06F21/50, monitoring users, programs or devices to maintain the integrity of platforms
    • G06F2221/034—Test or assess a computer or a system
    • G—PHYSICS
    • G06—COMPUTING; CALCULATING OR COUNTING
    • G06Q—INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY [ICT] SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES; SYSTEMS OR METHODS SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES, NOT OTHERWISE PROVIDED FOR
    • G06Q10/00—Administration; Management
    • G06Q10/06—Resources, workflows, human or project management; Enterprise or organisation planning; Enterprise or organisation modelling
    • G06Q10/063—Operations research, analysis or management
    • G06Q10/0635—Risk analysis of enterprise or organisation activities
    • H—ELECTRICITY
    • H04—ELECTRIC COMMUNICATION TECHNIQUE
    • H04L—TRANSMISSION OF DIGITAL INFORMATION, e.g. TELEGRAPHIC COMMUNICATION
    • H04L63/00—Network architectures or network communication protocols for network security
    • H04L63/14—Network architectures or network communication protocols for network security for detecting or protecting against malicious traffic
    • H04L63/1408—Network architectures or network communication protocols for network security for detecting or protecting against malicious traffic by monitoring network traffic
    • H04L63/1425—Traffic logging, e.g. anomaly detection
    • H—ELECTRICITY
    • H04—ELECTRIC COMMUNICATION TECHNIQUE
    • H04L—TRANSMISSION OF DIGITAL INFORMATION, e.g. TELEGRAPHIC COMMUNICATION
    • H04L67/00—Network arrangements or protocols for supporting network services or applications
    • H04L67/2866—Architectures; Arrangements
    • H04L67/30—Profiles
    • H04L67/306—User profiles

Definitions

  • This disclosure relates to threat mitigation systems and, more particularly, to threat mitigation systems that utilize Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Machine Learning (ML).
  • AI Artificial Intelligence
  • ML Machine Learning
  • a computer-implemented method is executed on a computing device and include: obtaining consolidated platform information to identify current security-relevant capabilities for a computing platform; determining possible security-relevant capabilities for the computing platform; and rendering graphical comparison information that illustrates a difference between the current security-relevant capabilities of the computing platform and the possible security-relevant capabilities of the computing platform.
  • the possible security-relevant capabilities may concern the possible security-relevant capabilities of the computing platform using the currently-deployed security-relevant subsystems.
  • the possible security-relevant capabilities may concern the possible security-relevant capabilities of the computing platform using one or more supplemental security-relevant subsystems.
  • the graphical comparison information that illustrates a difference between the current security-relevant capabilities of the computing platform and the possible security-relevant capabilities of the computing platform may include: multi-axial comparison information that illustrates the difference between the current security relevant capabilities of the computing platform and the possible security-relevant capabilities of the computing platform.
  • the graphical comparison information that illustrates a difference between the current security-relevant capabilities of the computing platform and the possible security-relevant capabilities of the computing platform may include: level-of-confidence comparison information that illustrates the difference between the current security-relevant capabilities of the computing platform and the possible security-relevant capabilities of the computing platform.
  • the consolidated platform information may be obtained from an independent information source.
  • the consolidated platform information may be obtained from a client information source.
  • a computer program product resides on a computer readable medium and has a plurality of instructions stored on it. When executed by a processor, the instructions cause the processor to perform operations including: obtaining consolidated platform information to identify current security- relevant capabilities for a computing platform; determining possible security-relevant capabilities for the computing platform; and rendering graphical comparison information that illustrates a difference between the current security-relevant capabilities of the computing platform and the possible security-relevant capabilities of the computing platform.
  • the possible security-relevant capabilities may concern the possible security-relevant capabilities of the computing platform using the currently-deployed security-relevant subsystems.
  • the possible security-relevant capabilities may concern the possible security-relevant capabilities of the computing platform using one or more supplemental security-relevant subsystems.
  • the graphical comparison information that illustrates a difference between the current security-relevant capabilities of the computing platform and the possible security-relevant capabilities of the computing platform may include: multi-axial comparison information that illustrates the difference between the current security relevant capabilities of the computing platform and the possible security-relevant capabilities of the computing platform.
  • the graphical comparison information that illustrates a difference between the current security-relevant capabilities of the computing platform and the possible security-relevant capabilities of the computing platform may include: level-of-confidence comparison information that illustrates the difference between the current security-relevant capabilities of the computing platform and the possible security-relevant capabilities of the computing platform.
  • the consolidated platform information may be obtained from an independent information source.
  • the consolidated platform information may be obtained from a client information source.
  • a computing system includes a processor and memory is configured to perform operations including: obtaining consolidated platform information to identify current security-relevant capabilities for a computing platform; determining possible security-relevant capabilities for the computing platform; and rendering graphical comparison information that illustrates a difference between the current security-relevant capabilities of the computing platform and the possible security relevant capabilities of the computing platform.
  • the possible security-relevant capabilities may concern the possible security-relevant capabilities of the computing platform using the currently-deployed security-relevant subsystems.
  • the possible security-relevant capabilities may concern the possible security-relevant capabilities of the computing platform using one or more supplemental security-relevant subsystems.
  • the graphical comparison information that illustrates a difference between the current security-relevant capabilities of the computing platform and the possible security-relevant capabilities of the computing platform may include: multi-axial comparison information that illustrates the difference between the current security relevant capabilities of the computing platform and the possible security-relevant capabilities of the computing platform.
  • the graphical comparison information that illustrates a difference between the current security-relevant capabilities of the computing platform and the possible security-relevant capabilities of the computing platform may include: level-of-confidence comparison information that illustrates the difference between the current security-relevant capabilities of the computing platform and the possible security-relevant capabilities of the computing platform.
  • the consolidated platform information may be obtained from an independent information source.
  • the consolidated platform information may be obtained from a client information source.
  • FIG. 1 is a diagrammatic view of a distributed computing network including a computing device that executes a threat mitigation process according to an embodiment of the present disclosure
  • FIG. 2 is a diagrammatic view of an exemplary probabilistic model rendered by a probabilistic process of the threat mitigation process of FIG. 1 according to an embodiment of the present disclosure
  • FIG. 3 is a diagrammatic view of the computing platform of FIG. 1 according to an embodiment of the present disclosure
  • FIG. 4 is a flowchart of an implementation of the threat mitigation process of FIG. 1 according to an embodiment of the present disclosure
  • FIGS. 5-6 are diagrammatic views of screens rendered by the threat mitigation process of FIG. 1 according to an embodiment of the present disclosure
  • FIGS. 7-9 are flowcharts of other implementations of the threat mitigation process of FIG. 1 according to an embodiment of the present disclosure.
  • FIG. 10 is a diagrammatic view of a screen rendered by the threat mitigation process of FIG. 1 according to an embodiment of the present disclosure
  • FIG 11 is a flowchart of another implementation of the threat mitigation process of FIG. 1 according to an embodiment of the present disclosure
  • FIG. 12 is a diagrammatic view of a screen rendered by the threat mitigation process of FIG. 1 according to an embodiment of the present disclosure
  • FIG. 13 is a flowchart of another implementation of the threat mitigation process of FIG. 1 according to an embodiment of the present disclosure
  • FIG. 14 is a diagrammatic view of a screen rendered by the threat mitigation process of FIG. 1 according to an embodiment of the present disclosure
  • FIG. 15 is a flowchart of another implementation of the threat mitigation process of FIG. 1 according to an embodiment of the present disclosure
  • FIG 16 is a diagrammatic view of screens rendered by the threat mitigation process of FIG. 1 according to an embodiment of the present disclosure
  • FIGS. 17-23 are flowcharts of other implementations of the threat mitigation process of FIG. 1 according to an embodiment of the present disclosure
  • FIG. 24 is a diagrammatic view of a screen rendered by the threat mitigation process of FIG. 1 according to an embodiment of the present disclosure
  • FIGS. 25-31 are flowcharts of other implementations of the threat mitigation process of FIG. 1 according to an embodiment of the present disclosure
  • FIG. 32 is a diagrammatic view of a screen rendered by the threat mitigation process of FIG. 1 according to an embodiment of the present disclosure
  • FIG. 33 is a flowchart of another implementation of the threat mitigation process of FIG. 1 according to an embodiment of the present disclosure
  • FIG. 34-35 are diagrammatic views of screens rendered by the threat mitigation process of FIG. 1 according to an embodiment of the present disclosure
  • FIG. 36 is a flowchart of another implementation of the threat mitigation process of FIG. 1 according to an embodiment of the present disclosure
  • FIG. 37 is a diagrammatic view of a screen rendered by the threat mitigation process of FIG. 1 according to an embodiment of the present disclosure
  • FIG. 38 is a flowchart of another implementation of the threat mitigation process of FIG. 1 according to an embodiment of the present disclosure
  • FIG. 39 is a diagrammatic view of a screen rendered by the threat mitigation process of FIG. 1 according to an embodiment of the present disclosure
  • FIG. 40 is a flowchart of another implementation of the threat mitigation process of FIG. 1 according to an embodiment of the present disclosure.
  • FIG. 41 is a diagrammatic view of a screen rendered by the threat mitigation process of FIG. 1 according to an embodiment of the present disclosure.
  • Threat mitigation process 10 may be implemented as a server-side process, a client-side process, or a hybrid server-side / client-side process.
  • threat mitigation process 10 may be implemented as a purely server-side process via threat mitigation process 10s.
  • threat mitigation process 10 may be implemented as a purely client-side process via one or more of threat mitigation process lOcl, threat mitigation process 10c2, threat mitigation process 10c3, and threat mitigation process 10c4.
  • threat mitigation process 10 may be implemented as a hybrid server-side / client-side process via threat mitigation process 10s in combination with one or more of threat mitigation process lOcl, threat mitigation process 10c2, threat mitigation process 10c3, and threat mitigation process 10c4. Accordingly, threat mitigation process 10 as used in this disclosure may include any combination of threat mitigation process 10s, threat mitigation process lOcl, threat mitigation process 10c2, threat mitigation process, and threat mitigation process 10c4.
  • Threat mitigation process 10s may be a server application and may reside on and may be executed by computing device 12, which may be connected to network 14 (e.g., the Internet or a local area network).
  • Examples of computing device 12 may include, but are not limited to: a personal computer, a laptop computer, a personal digital assistant, a data-enabled cellular telephone, a notebook computer, a television with one or more processors embedded therein or coupled thereto, a cable / satellite receiver with one or more processors embedded therein or coupled thereto, a server computer, a series of server computers, a mini computer, a mainframe computer, or a cloud-based computing network.
  • the instruction sets and subroutines of threat mitigation process 10s may be stored on storage device 16 coupled to computing device 12, may be executed by one or more processors (not shown) and one or more memory architectures (not shown) included within computing device 12.
  • Examples of storage device 16 may include but are not limited to: a hard disk drive; a RAID device; a random access memory (RAM); a read-only memory (ROM); and all forms of flash memory storage devices.
  • Network 14 may be connected to one or more secondary networks (e.g., network 18), examples of which may include but are not limited to: a local area network; a wide area network; or an intranet, for example.
  • secondary networks e.g., network 18
  • networks may include but are not limited to: a local area network; a wide area network; or an intranet, for example.
  • Examples of threat mitigation processes lOcl, 10c2, 10c3, 10c4 may include but are not limited to a client application, a web browser, a game console user interface, or a specialized application (e.g., an application running on e.g., the Android to platform or the iOS tm platform).
  • the instruction sets and subroutines of threat mitigation processes lOcl, 10c2, 10c3, 10c4, which may be stored on storage devices 20, 22, 24, 26 (respectively) coupled to client electronic devices 28, 30, 32, 34 (respectively), may be executed by one or more processors (not shown) and one or more memory architectures (not shown) incorporated into client electronic devices 28, 30, 32, 34 (respectively).
  • Examples of storage device 16 may include but are not limited to: a hard disk drive; a RAID device; a random access memory (RAM); a read-only memory (ROM); and all forms of flash memory storage devices.
  • Examples of client electronic devices 28, 30, 32, 34 may include, but are not limited to, data-enabled, cellular telephone 28, laptop computer 30, personal digital assistant 32, personal computer 34, a notebook computer (not shown), a server computer (not shown), a gaming console (not shown), a smart television (not shown), and a dedicated network device (not shown).
  • Client electronic devices 28, 30, 32, 34 may each execute an operating system, examples of which may include but are not limited to Microsoft Windows tm , Android tm , WebOS tm , iOS tm , Redhat Linux tm , or a custom operating system.
  • Users 36, 38, 40, 42 may access threat mitigation process 10 directly through network 14 or through secondary network 18. Further, threat mitigation process 10 may be connected to network 14 through secondary network 18, as illustrated with link line 44.
  • the various client electronic devices may be directly or indirectly coupled to network 14 (or network 18).
  • client electronic devices 28 and laptop computer 30 are shown wirelessly coupled to network 14 via wireless communication channels 46, 48 (respectively) established between data-enabled, cellular telephone 28, laptop computer 30 (respectively) and cellular network / bridge 50, which is shown directly coupled to network 14.
  • personal digital assistant 32 is shown wirelessly coupled to network 14 via wireless communication channel 52 established between personal digital assistant 32 and wireless access point (i.e., WAP) 54, which is shown directly coupled to network 14.
  • WAP wireless access point
  • personal computer 34 is shown directly coupled to network 18 via a hardwired network connection.
  • WAP 54 may be, for example, an IEEE 802.11a, 802.11b, 802. llg, 802.11h, Wi-Fi, and/or Bluetooth device that is capable of establishing wireless communication channel 52 between personal digital assistant 32 and WAP 54.
  • IEEE 802.1 lx specifications may use Ethernet protocol and carrier sense multiple access with collision avoidance (i.e., CSMA/CA) for path sharing.
  • the various 802.1 lx specifications may use phase-shift keying (i.e., PSK) modulation or complementary code keying (i.e., CCK) modulation, for example.
  • PSK phase-shift keying
  • CCK complementary code keying
  • Bluetooth is a telecommunications industry specification that allows e.g., mobile phones, computers, and personal digital assistants to be interconnected using a short-range wireless connection. Artificial Intelligence / Machines Learning Overview:
  • threat mitigation process 10 includes probabilistic process 56 (e.g., an artificial intelligence / machine learning process) that is configured to process information (e.g., information 58).
  • information 58 may include but are not limited to platform information (e.g., structured or unstructured content) being scanned to detect security events (e.g., access auditing; anomalies; authentication; denial of services; exploitation; malware; phishing; spamming; reconnaissance; and/or web attack) within a monitored computing platform (e.g., computing platform 60).
  • structured content may be content that is separated into independent portions (e.g., fields, columns, features) and, therefore, may have a pre defined data model and/or is organized in a pre-defmed manner.
  • a first field, column or feature may define the first name of the employee
  • a second field, column or feature may define the last name of the employee
  • a third field, column or feature may define the home address of the employee
  • a fourth field, column or feature may define the hire date of the employee.
  • unstructured content may be content that is not separated into independent portions (e.g., fields, columns, features) and, therefore, may not have a pre-defmed data model and/or is not organized in a pre-defmed manner.
  • the unstructured content concerns the same employee list: the first name of the employee, the last name of the employee, the home address of the employee, and the hire date of the employee may all be combined into one field, column or feature.
  • information 58 is unstructured content, an example of which may include but is not limited to unstructured user feedback received by a company (e.g., text-based feedback such as text-messages, social media posts, and email messages; and transcribed voice-based feedback such as transcribed voice mail, and transcribed voice messages).
  • a company e.g., text-based feedback such as text-messages, social media posts, and email messages; and transcribed voice-based feedback such as transcribed voice mail, and transcribed voice messages.
  • probabilistic process 56 may use probabilistic modeling to accomplish such processing, wherein examples of such probabilistic modeling may include but are not limited to discriminative modeling, generative modeling , or combinations thereof.
  • probabilistic modeling may be used within modern artificial intelligence systems (e.g., probabilistic process 56), in that these probabilistic models may provide artificial intelligence systems with the tools required to autonomously analyze vast quantities of data (e.g., information 58).
  • Examples of the tasks for which probabilistic modeling may be utilized may include but are not limited to:
  • probabilistic process 56 may define an initial probabilistic model for accomplishing a defined task (e.g., the analyzing of information 58).
  • a defined task e.g., the analyzing of information 58.
  • this defined task is analyzing customer feedback (e.g., information 58) that is received from customers of e.g., store 62 via an automated feedback phone line.
  • information 58 is initially voice- based content that is processed via e.g., a speech-to-text process that results in unstructured text-based customer feedback (e.g., information 58).
  • a probabilistic model may be utilized to go from initial observations about information 58 (e.g., as represented by the initial branches of a probabilistic model) to conclusions about information 58 (e.g., as represented by the leaves of a probabilistic model).
  • the term “branch” may refer to the existence (or non-existence) of a component (e.g., a sub-model) of (or included within) a model.
  • a component e.g., a sub-model
  • Examples of such a branch may include but are not limited to: an execution branch of a probabilistic program or other generative model, a part (or parts) of a probabilistic graphical model, and/or a component neural network that may (or may not) have been previously trained.
  • probabilistic model 100 may be utilized to analyze information 58 (e.g.. unstructured text-based customer feedback) concerning store 62.
  • information 58 e.g.. unstructured text-based customer feedback
  • probabilistic model 100 may receive information 58 (e.g.. unstructured text-based customer feedback) at branching node 102 for processing.
  • probabilistic model 100 includes four branches off of branching node 102, namely: service branch 104; selection branch 106; location branch 108; and value branch 110 that respectively lead to service node 112, selection node 114, location node 116, and value node 118.
  • service branch 104 may lead to service node 112, which may be configured to process the portion of information 58 (e.g.. unstructured text-based customer feedback) that concerns (in whole or in part) feedback concerning the customer service of store 62.
  • service node 112 may define service word list 120 that may include e.g., the word service, as well as synonyms of (and words related to) the word service (e.g., cashier, employee, greeter and manager).
  • a portion of information 58 (e.g., a text-based customer feedback message) includes the word cashier, employee, greeter and/or manager
  • that portion of information 58 may be considered to be text-based customer feedback concerning the service received at store 62 and (therefore) may be routed to service node 112 of probabilistic model 100 for further processing.
  • probabilistic model 100 includes two branches off of service node 112, namely: good service branch 122 and bad service branch 124.
  • Good service branch 122 may lead to good service node 126, which may be configured to process the portion of information 58 (e.g...
  • good service node 126 may define good service word list 128 that may include e.g., the word good, as well as synonyms of (and words related to) the word good (e.g., courteous, friendly, stylish, happy, and smiling). Accordingly and in the event that a portion of information 58 (e.g., a text-based customer feedback message) that was routed to service node 112 includes the word good, courteous, friendly, stylish, happy, and/or smiling, that portion of information 58 may be considered to be text-based customer feedback indicative of good service received at store 62 (and, therefore, may be routed to good service node 126).
  • good service word list 128 may include e.g., the word good, as well as synonyms of (and words related to) the word good (e.g., courteous, friendly, stylish, happy, and smiling). Accordingly and in the event that a portion of information 58 (e.g., a text-based customer feedback message) that was routed to service node 112 includes the word good,
  • Bad service branch 124 may lead to bad service node 130, which may be configured to process the portion of information 58 (e.g.. unstructured text-based customer feedback) that concerns (in whole or in part) bad feedback concerning the customer service of store 62.
  • bad service node 130 may define bad service word list 132 that may include e.g., the word bad, as well as synonyms of (and words related to) the word bad (e.g., rude, mean, jerk, exotic, and scowling).
  • a portion of information 58 e.g., a text-based customer feedback message
  • that portion of information 58 may be considered to be text- based customer feedback indicative of bad service received at store 62 (and, therefore, may be routed to bad service node 130).
  • selection branch 106 may lead to selection node 114, which may be configured to process the portion of information 58 (e.g.. unstructured text-based customer feedback) that concerns (in whole or in part) feedback concerning the selection available at store 62.
  • selection node 114 may define selection word list 134 that may include e.g., words indicative of the selection available at store 62.
  • a portion of information 58 (e.g., a text-based customer feedback message) includes any of the words defined within selection word list 134, that portion of information 58 may be considered to be text-based customer feedback concerning the selection available at store 62 and (therefore) may be routed to selection node 114 of probabilistic model 100 for further processing.
  • probabilistic model 100 includes two branches off of selection node 114, namely: good selection branch 136 and bad selection branch 138.
  • Good selection branch 136 may lead to good selection node 140, which may be configured to process the portion of information 58 (e.g.. unstructured text-based customer feedback) that concerns (in whole or in part) good feedback concerning the selection available at store 62.
  • good selection node 140 may define good selection word list 142 that may include words indicative of a good selection at store 62. Accordingly and in the event that a portion of information 58 (e.g., a text-based customer feedback message) that was routed to selection node 114 includes any of the words defined within good selection word list 142, that portion of information 58 may be considered to be text-based customer feedback indicative of a good selection available at store 62 (and, therefore, may be routed to good selection node 140).
  • a portion of information 58 e.g., a text-based customer feedback message
  • Bad selection branch 138 may lead to bad selection node 144, which may be configured to process the portion of information 58 (e.g.. unstructured text-based customer feedback) that concerns (in whole or in part) bad feedback concerning the selection available at store 62.
  • bad selection node 144 may define bad selection word list 146 that may include words indicative of a bad selection at store 62.
  • a portion of information 58 (e.g., a text-based customer feedback message) that was routed to selection node 114 includes any of the words defined within bad selection word list 146, that portion of information 58 may be considered to be text-based customer feedback indicative of a bad selection being available at store 62 (and, therefore, may be routed to bad selection node 144).
  • location branch 108 may lead to location node 116, which may be configured to process the portion of information 58 (e.g.. unstructured text-based customer feedback) that concerns (in whole or in part) feedback concerning the location of store 62.
  • location node 116 may define location word list 148 that may include e.g., words indicative of the location of store 62. Accordingly and in the event that a portion of information 58 (e.g., a text-based customer feedback message) includes any of the words defined within location word list 148, that portion of information 58 may be considered to be text-based customer feedback concerning the location of store 62 and (therefore) may be routed to location node 116 of probabilistic model 100 for further processing. Assume for this illustrative example that probabilistic model 100 includes two branches off of location node 116, namely: good location branch 150 and bad location branch 152.
  • Good location branch 150 may lead to good location node 154, which may be configured to process the portion of information 58 (e.g.. unstructured text-based customer feedback) that concerns (in whole or in part) good feedback concerning the location of store 62.
  • good location node 154 may define good location word list 156 that may include words indicative of store 62 being in a good location.
  • a portion of information 58 (e.g., a text-based customer feedback message) that was routed to location node 116 includes any of the words defined within good location word list 156, that portion of information 58 may be considered to be text-based customer feedback indicative of store 62 being in a good location (and, therefore, may be routed to good location node 154).
  • Bad location branch 152 may lead to bad location node 158, which may be configured to process the portion of information 58 (e.g.. unstructured text-based customer feedback) that concerns (in whole or in part) bad feedback concerning the location of store 62.
  • bad location node 158 may define bad location word list 160 that may include words indicative of store 62 being in a bad location.
  • a portion of information 58 (e.g., a text-based customer feedback message) that was routed to location node 116 includes any of the words defined within bad location word list 160, that portion of information 58 may be considered to be text-based customer feedback indicative of store 62 being in a bad location (and, therefore, may be routed to bad location node 158).
  • value branch 110 may lead to value node 118, which may be configured to process the portion of information 58 (e.g.. unstructured text-based customer feedback) that concerns (in whole or in part) feedback concerning the value received at store 62.
  • value node 118 may define value word list 162 that may include e.g., words indicative of the value received at store 62.
  • a portion of information 58 e.g., a text-based customer feedback message
  • that portion of information 58 may be considered to be text-based customer feedback concerning the value received at store 62 and (therefore) may be routed to value node 118 of probabilistic model 100 for further processing.
  • probabilistic model 100 includes two branches off of value node 118, namely: good value branch 164 and bad value branch 166.
  • Good value branch 164 may lead to good value node 168, which may be configured to process the portion of information 58 (e.g.. unstructured text-based customer feedback) that concerns (in whole or in part) good value being received at store 62.
  • good value node 168 may define good value word list 170 that may include words indicative of receiving good value at store 62. Accordingly and in the event that a portion of information 58 (e.g., a text-based customer feedback message) that was routed to value node 118 includes any of the words defined within good value word list 170, that portion of information 58 may be considered to be text-based customer feedback indicative of good value being received at store 62 (and, therefore, may be routed to good value node 168).
  • a portion of information 58 e.g., a text-based customer feedback message
  • Bad value branch 166 may lead to bad value node 172, which may be configured to process the portion of information 58 (e.g.. unstructured text-based customer feedback) that concerns (in whole or in part) bad value being received at store 62.
  • bad value node 172 may define bad value word list 174 that may include words indicative of receiving bad value at store 62. Accordingly and in the event that a portion of information 58 (e.g., a text-based customer feedback message) that was routed to value node 118 includes any of the words defined within bad value word list 174, that portion of information 58 may be considered to be text-based customer feedback indicative of bad value being received at store 62 (and, therefore, may be routed to bad value node 172).
  • a portion of information 58 e.g., a text-based customer feedback message
  • representatives and/or agents of store 62 may address the provider of such good or bad feedback via e.g., social media postings, text-messages and/or personal contact.
  • probabilistic process 56 may identify any pertinent content that is included within feedback 64.
  • probabilistic process 56 may identify the pertinent content (included within feedback 64) as the phrase “my cashier was rude” and may ignore / remove the irrelevant content “the weather was rainy”.
  • feedback 64 includes the word “cashier”
  • probabilistic process 56 may route feedback 64 to service node 112 via service branch 104.
  • probabilistic process 56 may route feedback 64 to bad service node 130 via bad service branch 124 and may consider feedback 64 to be text-based customer feedback indicative of bad service being received at store 62.
  • probabilistic process 56 may identify the pertinent content (included within feedback 64) as the phrase “the clothing I purchased was classy” and may ignore / remove the irrelevant content “my cab got stuck in traffic”.
  • feedback 64 includes the word “clothing”
  • probabilistic process 56 may route feedback 64 to selection node 114 via selection branch 106.
  • probabilistic process 56 may route feedback 64 to good selection node 140 via good selection branch 136 and may consider feedback 64 to be text-based customer feedback indicative of a good selection being available at store 62.
  • probabilistic model 100 may be utilized to categorize information 58, thus allowing the various messages included within information 58 to be routed to (in this simplified example) one of eight nodes (e.g., good service node 126, bad service node 130, good selection node 140, bad selection node 144, good location node 154, bad location node 158, good value node 168, and bad value node 172).
  • nodes e.g., good service node 126, bad service node 130, good selection node 140, bad selection node 144, good location node 154, bad location node 158, good value node 168, and bad value node 172.
  • store 62 is a long-standing and well established shopping establishment.
  • information 58 is a very large quantity of voice mail messages (>10,000 messages) that were left by customers of store 62 on a voice-based customer feedback line. Additionally, assume that this very large quantity of voice mail messages (>10,000) have been transcribed into a very large quantity of text-based messages
  • Probabilistic process 56 may be configured to automatically define probabilistic model 100 based upon information 58. Accordingly, probabilistic process 56 may receive content (e.g., a very large quantity of text-based messages) and may be configured to define one or more probabilistic model variables for probabilistic model 100. For example, probabilistic process 56 may be configured to allow a user to specify such probabilistic model variables. Another example of such variables may include but is not limited to values and/or ranges of values for a data flow variable. For the following discussion and for this disclosure, examples of a “variable” may include but are not limited to variables, parameters, ranges, branches and nodes.
  • probabilistic process 56 defines the initial number of branches (i.e., the number of branches off of branching node 102) within probabilistic model 100 as four (i.e., service branch 104, selection branch 106, location branch 108 and value branch 110).
  • the defining of the initial number of branches (i.e., the number of branches off of branching node 102) within probabilistic model 100 as four may be effectuated in various ways (e.g., manually or algorithmically).
  • probabilistic process 56 may process information 58 to identify the pertinent content included within information 58. As discussed above, probabilistic process 56 may identify the pertinent content (included within information 58) and may ignore / remove the irrelevant content. [0080] This type of processing of information 58 may continue for all of the very large quantity of text-based messages (>10,000) included within information 58. And using the probabilistic modeling technique described above, probabilistic process 56 may define a first version of the probabilistic model (e.g., probabilistic model 100) based, at least in part, upon pertinent content found within information 58.
  • a first version of the probabilistic model e.g., probabilistic model 100
  • a first text-based message included within information 58 may be processed to extract pertinent information from that first message, wherein this pertinent information may be grouped in a manner to correspond (at least temporarily) with the requirement that four branches originate from branching node 102 (as defined above).
  • probabilistic process 56 may identify patterns within these text-based message included within information 58.
  • the messages may all concern one or more of the service, the selection, the location and/or the value of store 62.
  • probabilistic process 56 may process information 58 to e.g.: a) sort text- based messages concerning the service into positive or negative service messages; b) sort text-based messages concerning the selection into positive or negative selection messages; c) sort text-based messages concerning the location into positive or negative location messages; and/or d) sort text-based messages concerning the value into positive or negative service messages.
  • probabilistic process 56 may define various lists (e.g., lists 128, 132, 142, 146, 156, 160, 170, 174) by starting with a root word (e.g., good or bad) and may then determine synonyms for these words and use those words and synonyms to populate lists 128, 132, 142, 146, 156, 160, 170, 174.
  • a root word e.g., good or bad
  • probabilistic process 56 may define a first version of the probabilistic model (e.g., probabilistic model 100) based, at least in part, upon pertinent content found within information 58. Probabilistic process 56 may compare the first version of the probabilistic model (e.g., probabilistic model 100) to information 58 to determine if the first version of the probabilistic model (e.g., probabilistic model 100) is a good explanation of the content.
  • probabilistic process 56 may use an ML algorithm to fit the first version of the probabilistic model (e.g., probabilistic model 100) to the content, wherein examples of such an ML algorithm may include but are not limited to one or more of: an inferencing algorithm, a learning algorithm, an optimization algorithm, and a statistical algorithm.
  • probabilistic model 100 may be used to generate messages (in addition to analyzing them). For example and when defining a first version of the probabilistic model (e.g., probabilistic model 100) based, at least in part, upon pertinent content found within information 58, probabilistic process 56 may define a weight for each branch within probabilistic model 100 based upon information 58. For example, threat mitigation process 10 may equally weight each of branches 104, 106, 108, 110 at 25%. Alternatively, if e.g., a larger percentage of information 58 concerned the service received at store 62, threat mitigation process 10 may equally weight each of branches 106, 108, 110 at 20%, while more heavily weighting branch 104 at 40%.
  • a first version of the probabilistic model e.g., probabilistic model 100
  • probabilistic process 56 may define a weight for each branch within probabilistic model 100 based upon information 58. For example, threat mitigation process 10 may equally weight each of branches 104, 106, 108, 110 at 25%. Alternatively, if e.g.,
  • probabilistic process 56 may generate a very large quantity of messages e.g., by auto-generating messages using the above-described probabilities, the above-described nodes & node types, and the words defined in the above-described lists (e.g., lists 128, 132, 142, 146, 156, 160, 170, 174), thus resulting in generated information 58’.
  • Generated information 58’ may then be compared to information 58 to determine if the first version of the probabilistic model (e.g., probabilistic model 100) is a good explanation of the content. For example, if generated information 58’ exceeds a threshold level of similarity to information 58, the first version of the probabilistic model (e.g., probabilistic model 100) may be deemed a good explanation of the content. Conversely, if generated information 58’ does not exceed a threshold level of similarity to information 58, the first version of the probabilistic model (e.g., probabilistic model 100) may be deemed not a good explanation of the content.
  • the first version of the probabilistic model e.g., probabilistic model 100
  • probabilistic process 56 may define a revised version of the probabilistic model (e.g., revised probabilistic model 100’).
  • probabilistic process 56 may e.g., adjust weighting, adjust probabilities, adjust node counts, adjust node types, and/or adjust branch counts to define the revised version of the probabilistic model (e.g., revised probabilistic model 100’).
  • the above-described process of auto-generating messages may be repeated and this newly-generated content (e.g., generated information 58”) may be compared to information 58 to determine if e.g., revised probabilistic model 100’ is a good explanation of the content. If revised probabilistic model 100’ is not a good explanation of the content, the above-described process may be repeated until a proper probabilistic model is defined.
  • threat mitigation process 10 may include probabilistic process 56 (e.g., an artificial intelligence / machine learning process) that may be configured to process information (e.g., information 58), wherein examples of information 58 may include but are not limited to platform information (e.g., structured or unstructured content) that may be scanned to detect security events (e.g., access auditing; anomalies; authentication; denial of services; exploitation; malware; phishing; spamming; reconnaissance; and/or web attack) within a monitored computing platform (e.g., computing platform 60).
  • probabilistic process 56 e.g., an artificial intelligence / machine learning process
  • information 58 may include but are not limited to platform information (e.g., structured or unstructured content) that may be scanned to detect security events (e.g., access auditing; anomalies; authentication; denial of services; exploitation; malware; phishing; spamming; reconnaissance; and/or web attack) within a monitored computing platform (e.g., computing platform 60).
  • the monitored computing platform utilized by business today may be a highly complex, multi -location computing system / network that may span multiple buildings / locations / countries.
  • the monitored computing platform e.g., computing platform 60
  • the monitored computing platform is shown to include many discrete computing devices, examples of which may include but are not limited to: server computers (e.g., server computers 200, 202), desktop computers (e.g., desktop computer 204), and laptop computers (e.g., laptop computer 206), all of which may be coupled together via a network (e.g., network 208), such as an Ethernet network.
  • a network e.g., network 208
  • Computing platform 60 may be coupled to an external network (e.g., Internet 210) through WAF (i.e., Web Application Firewall) 212.
  • WAF Web Application Firewall
  • a wireless access point e.g., WAP 2114 may be configured to allow wireless devices (e.g., smartphone 216) to access computing platform 60.
  • Computing platform 60 may include various connectivity devices that enable the coupling of devices within computing platform 60, examples of which may include but are not limited to: switch 216, router 218 and gateway 220.
  • Computing platform 60 may also include various storage devices (e.g., NAS 222), as well as functionality (e.g., API Gateway 224) that allows software applications to gain access to one or more resources within computing platform 60.
  • security-relevant subsystems 226 may be deployed within computing platform 60 to monitor the operation of (and the activity within) computing platform 60.
  • security-relevant subsystems 226 may include but are not limited to: CDN (i.e., Content Delivery Network) systems; DAM (i.e., Database Activity Monitoring) systems; UBA (i.e., User Behavior Analytics) systems; MDM (i.e., Mobile Device Management) systems; IAM (i.e., Identity and Access Management) systems; DNS (i.e., Domain Name Server) systems, antivirus systems, operating systems, data lakes; data logs; security- relevant software applications; security-relevant hardware systems; and resources external to the computing platform.
  • CDN i.e., Content Delivery Network
  • DAM i.e., Database Activity Monitoring
  • UBA i.e., User Behavior Analytics
  • MDM i.e., Mobile Device Management
  • IAM i.e., Identity and Access Management
  • DNS i.e., Domain Name Server
  • Each of security-relevant subsystems 226 may monitor and log their activity with respect to computing platform 60, resulting in the generation of platform information 228.
  • platform information 228 associated with a client-defined MDM (i.e., Mobile Device Management) system may monitor and log the mobile devices that were allowed access to computing platform 60.
  • SEIM Security Information and Event Management
  • SIEM system 230 is an approach to security management that combines SIM (security information management) functionality and SEM (security event management) functionality into one security management system.
  • SIM security information management
  • SEM security event management
  • the underlying principles of a SIEM system is to aggregate relevant data from multiple sources, identify deviations from the norm and take appropriate action. For example, when a security event is detected, SIEM system 230 might log additional information, generate an alert and instruct other security controls to mitigate the security event.
  • SIEM system 230 may be configured to monitor and log the activity of security-relevant subsystems 226 (e.g., CDN (i.e., Content Delivery Network) systems; DAM (i.e., Database Activity Monitoring) systems; UBA (i.e., User Behavior Analytics) systems; MDM (i.e., Mobile Device Management) systems; IAM (i.e., Identity and Access Management) systems; DNS (i.e., Domain Name Server) systems, antivirus systems, operating systems, data lakes; data logs; security relevant software applications; security-relevant hardware systems; and resources external to the computing platform).
  • CDN i.e., Content Delivery Network
  • DAM i.e., Database Activity Monitoring
  • UBA i.e., User Behavior Analytics
  • MDM i.e., Mobile Device Management
  • IAM i.e., Identity and Access Management
  • DNS i.e., Domain Name Server
  • threat mitigation process 10 may be configured to e.g., analyze computing platform 60 and provide reports to third-parties concerning the same. [0093] Referring also to FIGS. 4-6, threat mitigation process 10 may be configured to obtain and combine information from multiple security-relevant subsystem to generate a security profile for computing platform 60.
  • threat mitigation process 10 may obtain 300 first system-defined platform information (e.g., system-defined platform information 232) concerning a first security-relevant subsystem (e.g., the number of operating systems deployed) within computing platform 60 and may obtain 302 at least a second system-defined platform information (e.g., system-defined platform information 234) concerning at least a second security-relevant subsystem (e.g., the number of antivirus systems deployed) within computing platform 60.
  • first system-defined platform information e.g., system-defined platform information 232
  • first security-relevant subsystem e.g., the number of operating systems deployed
  • second system-defined platform information e.g., system-defined platform information 234
  • second security-relevant subsystem e.g., the number of antivirus systems deployed
  • the first system-defined platform information (e.g., system-defined platform information 232) and the at least a second system-defined platform information (e.g., system-defined platform information 234) may be obtained from one or more log files defined for computing platform 60.
  • system-defined platform information 232 and/or system-defined platform information 234 may be obtained from SIEM system 230, wherein (and as discussed above) SIEM system 230 may be configured to monitor and log the activity of security-relevant subsystems 226 (e.g., CDN (i.e., Content Delivery Network) systems; DAM (i.e., Database Activity Monitoring) systems; UBA (i.e., User Behavior Analytics) systems; MDM (i.e., Mobile Device Management) systems; IAM (i.e., Identity and Access Management) systems; DNS (i.e., Domain Name Server) systems, antivirus systems, operating systems, data lakes; data logs; security-relevant software applications; security-relevant hardware systems; and resources external to the computing platform).
  • security-relevant subsystems 226 e.g., CDN (i.e., Content Delivery Network) systems; DAM (i.e., Database Activity Monitoring) systems; UBA (i.e., User Behavior Analytics) systems; MDM (i.e., Mobile Device Management) systems; I
  • the first system-defined platform information (e.g., system- defined platform information 232) and the at least a second system-defined platform information (e.g., system-defined platform information 234) may be obtained from the first security-relevant subsystem (e.g., the operating systems themselves) and the at least a second security-relevant subsystem (e.g., the antivirus systems themselves).
  • system-defined platform information 232 and/or system-defined platform information 234 may be obtained directly from the security-relevant subsystems (e.g., the operating systems and/or the antivirus systems), which (as discussed above) may be configured to self-document their activity.
  • Threat mitigation process 10 may combine 308 the first system-defined platform information (e.g., system-defined platform information 232) and the at least a second system-defined platform information (e.g., system-defined platform information 234) to form system-defined consolidated platform information 236.
  • system-defined consolidated platform information 236 may independently define the security-relevant subsystems (e.g., security-relevant subsystems 226) present on computing platform 60.
  • Threat mitigation process 10 may generate 310 a security profile (e.g., security profile 350) based, at least in part, upon system-defined consolidated platform information 236.
  • security profile e.g., security profile 350
  • the user / owner / operator of computing platform 60 may be able to see that e.g., they have a security score of 605 out of a possible score of 1,000, wherein the average customer has a security score of 237.
  • security profile 350 in shown in the example to include several indicators that may enable a user to compare (in this example) computing platform 60 to other computing platforms, this is for illustrative purposes only and is not intended to be a limitation of this disclosure, as it is understood that other configurations are possible and are considered to be within the scope of this disclosure.
  • security profile 350 may be varied greatly depending upon the design criteria and anticipated performance / use of threat mitigation process 10. Accordingly, the appearance, format, completeness and content of security profile 350 is for illustrative purposes only and is not intended to be a limitation of this disclosure, as other configurations are possible and are considered to be within the scope of this disclosure. For example, content may be added to security profile 350, removed from security profile 350, and/or reformatted within security profile 350.
  • threat mitigation process 10 may obtain 312 client-defined consolidated platform information 238 for computing platform 60 from a client information source, examples of which may include but are not limited to one or more client-completed questionnaires (e.g., questionnaires 240) and/or one or more client- deployed platform monitors (e.g., client-deployed platform monitor 242, which may be configured to effectuate SIEM functionality).
  • client-defined consolidated platform information 238 may define the security-relevant subsystems (e.g., security-relevant subsystems 226) that the client believes are present on computing platform 60.
  • threat mitigation process 10 may compare 314 the system-defined consolidated platform information (e.g., system-defined consolidated platform information 236) to the client- defined consolidated platform information (e.g., client-defined consolidated platform information 238) to define differential consolidated platform information 352 for computing platform 60.
  • Differential consolidated platform information 352 may include comparison table 354 that e.g., compares computing platform 60 to other computing platforms.
  • comparison table 354 is shown to include three columns, namely: security-relevant subsystem column 356 (that identifies the security-relevant subsystems in question); system-defined consolidated platform information column 358 (that is based upon system-defined consolidated platform information 236 and independently defines what security-relevant subsystems are present on computing platform 60); and client-defined consolidated platform column 360 (that is based upon client-defined platform information 238 and defines what security -relevant subsystems the client believes are present on computing platform 60).
  • differential consolidated platform information 352 may be varied greatly depending upon the design criteria and anticipated performance / use of threat mitigation process 10. Accordingly, the appearance, format, completeness and content of differential consolidated platform information 352 is for illustrative purposes only and is not intended to be a limitation of this disclosure, as other configurations are possible and are considered to be within the scope of this disclosure. For example, content may be added to differential consolidated platform information 352, removed from differential consolidated platform information 352, and/or reformatted within differential consolidated platform information 352.
  • threat mitigation process 10 may be configured to compare what security relevant subsystems are actually included within computing platform 60 versus what security relevant subsystems were believed to be included within computing platform 60. As discussed above, threat mitigation process 10 may combine 308 the first system-defined platform information (e.g., system-defined platform information 232) and the at least a second system-defined platform information (e.g., system-defined platform information 234) to form system-defined consolidated platform information 236.
  • first system-defined platform information e.g., system-defined platform information 232
  • second system-defined platform information e.g., system-defined platform information 2344
  • Threat mitigation process 10 may obtain 400 system-defined consolidated platform information 236 for computing platform 60 from an independent information source, examples of which may include but are not limited to: one or more log files defined for computing platform 60 (e.g., such as those maintained by SIEM system 230); and two or more security-relevant subsystems (e.g., directly from the operating system security-relevant subsystem and the antivirus security-relevant subsystem) deployed within computing platform 60.
  • an independent information source examples of which may include but are not limited to: one or more log files defined for computing platform 60 (e.g., such as those maintained by SIEM system 230); and two or more security-relevant subsystems (e.g., directly from the operating system security-relevant subsystem and the antivirus security-relevant subsystem) deployed within computing platform 60.
  • threat mitigation process 10 may obtain 312 client-defined consolidated platform information 238 for computing platform 60 from a client information source, examples of which may include but are not limited to one or more client-completed questionnaires (e.g., questionnaires 240) and/or one or more client-deployed platform monitors (e.g., client-deployed platform monitor 242, which may be configured to effectuate SIEM functionality).
  • client information source examples of which may include but are not limited to one or more client-completed questionnaires (e.g., questionnaires 240) and/or one or more client-deployed platform monitors (e.g., client-deployed platform monitor 242, which may be configured to effectuate SIEM functionality).
  • threat mitigation process 10 may compare 402 system-defined consolidated platform information 236 to client-defined consolidated platform information 238 to define differential consolidated platform information 352 for computing platform 60, wherein differential consolidated platform information 352 may include comparison table 354 that e.g., compares computing platform 60 to other computing platforms..
  • Threat mitigation process 10 may process 404 system-defined consolidated platform information 236 prior to comparing 402 system-defined consolidated platform information 236 to client-defined consolidated platform information 238 to define differential consolidated platform information 352 for computing platform 60. Specifically, threat mitigation process 10 may process 404 system-defined consolidated platform information 236 so that it is comparable to client- defined consolidated platform information 238.
  • threat mitigation process 10 may homogenize 406 system- defined consolidated platform information 236 prior to comparing 402 system-defined consolidated platform information 236 to client-defined consolidated platform information 238 to define differential consolidated platform information 352 for computing platform 60.
  • Such homogenization 406 may result in system-defined consolidated platform information 236 and client-defined consolidated platform information 238 being comparable to each other (e.g., to accommodate for differing data nomenclatures / headers).
  • threat mitigation process 10 may normalize 408 system-defined consolidated platform information 236 prior to comparing 402 system-defined consolidated platform information 236 to client-defined consolidated platform information 238 to define differential consolidated platform information 352 for computing platform 60 (e.g., to accommodate for data differing scales / ranges).
  • threat mitigation process 10 may be configured to compare what security relevant subsystems are actually included within computing platform 60 versus what security relevant subsystems were believed to be included within computing platform 60.
  • threat mitigation process 10 may obtain 400 system- defined consolidated platform information 236 for computing platform 60 from an independent information source, examples of which may include but are not limited to: one or more log files defined for computing platform 60 (e.g., such as those maintained by SIEM system 230); and two or more security-relevant subsystems (e.g., directly from the operating system security-relevant subsystem and the antivirus security-relevant subsystem) deployed within computing platform 60
  • an independent information source examples of which may include but are not limited to: one or more log files defined for computing platform 60 (e.g., such as those maintained by SIEM system 230); and two or more security-relevant subsystems (e.g., directly from the operating system security-relevant subsystem and the antivirus security-relevant subsystem) deployed within computing platform 60
  • threat mitigation process 10 may obtain 312 client-defined consolidated platform information 238 for computing platform 60 from a client information source, examples of which may include but are not limited to one or more client-completed questionnaires (e.g., questionnaires 240) and/or one or more client-deployed platform monitors (e.g., client-deployed platform monitor 242, which may be configured to effectuate SIEM functionality).
  • client information source examples of which may include but are not limited to one or more client-completed questionnaires (e.g., questionnaires 240) and/or one or more client-deployed platform monitors (e.g., client-deployed platform monitor 242, which may be configured to effectuate SIEM functionality).
  • Threat mitigation process 10 may present 450 differential consolidated platform information 352 for computing platform 60 to a third-party, examples of which may include but are not limited to the user / owner / operator of computing platform 60.
  • threat mitigation process 10 may compare 402 system-defined consolidated platform information 236 to client-defined consolidated platform information 238 to define differential consolidated platform information 352 for computing platform 60, wherein differential consolidated platform information 352 may include comparison table 354 that e.g., compares computing platform 60 to other computing platforms, wherein (and as discussed above) threat mitigation process 10 may process 404 (e.g., via homogenizing 406 and/or normalizing 408) system-defined consolidated platform information 236 prior to comparing 402 system-defined consolidated platform information 236 to client-defined consolidated platform information 236 to define differential consolidated platform information 352 for computing platform 60.
  • comparison table 354 that e.g., compares computing platform 60 to other computing platforms
  • threat mitigation process 10 may process 404 (e.g., via homogenizing 406 and/or normalizing 408) system-defined consolidated platform information 236 prior to comparing 402 system-defined consolidated platform information 236 to client-defined consolidated platform information 236 to define differential consolidated platform information 352 for computing platform 60
  • threat mitigation process 10 may be configured to e.g., analyze & display the vulnerabilities of computing platform 60.
  • threat mitigation process 10 may be configured to make recommendations concerning security relevant subsystems that are missing from computing platform 60.
  • threat mitigation process 10 may obtain 500 consolidated platform information for computing platform 60 to identify one or more deployed security-relevant subsystems 226 (e.g., CDN (i.e., Content Delivery Network) systems; DAM (i.e., Database Activity Monitoring) systems; UBA (i.e., User Behavior Analytics) systems; MDM (i.e., Mobile Device Management) systems; IAM (i.e., Identity and Access Management) systems; DNS (i.e., Domain Name Server) systems, antivirus systems, operating systems, data lakes; data logs; security-relevant software applications; security-relevant hardware systems; and resources external to the computing platform).
  • CDN i.e., Content Delivery Network
  • DAM i.e., Database Activity Monitoring
  • UBA i.e., User Behavior Analytics
  • MDM i.e., Mobile Device Management
  • IAM i.e., Identity and Access Management
  • DNS i.e., Domain
  • This consolidated platform information may be obtained from an independent information source (e.g., such as SIEM system 230 that may provide system-defined consolidated platform information 236) and/or may be obtained from a client information source (e.g., such as questionnaires 240 that may provide client-defined consolidated platform information 238).
  • an independent information source e.g., such as SIEM system 230 that may provide system-defined consolidated platform information 236
  • client information source e.g., such as questionnaires 240 that may provide client-defined consolidated platform information 238.
  • threat mitigation process 10 may process 506 the consolidated platform information (e.g., system-defined consolidated platform information 236 and/or client-defined consolidated platform information 238) to identify one or more non-deployed security-relevant subsystems (within computing platform 60) and may then generate 508 a list of ranked & recommended security-relevant subsystems (e.g., non-deployed security-relevant subsystem list 550) that ranks the one or more non- deployed security-relevant subsystems.
  • consolidated platform information e.g., system-defined consolidated platform information 236 and/or client-defined consolidated platform information 2348
  • a list of ranked & recommended security-relevant subsystems e.g., non-deployed security-relevant subsystem list 550
  • non-deployed security-relevant subsystem list 550 is shown to include column 552 that identifies six non-deployed security-relevant subsystems, namely: a CDN subsystem, a WAF subsystem, a DAM subsystem; a UBA subsystem; a API subsystem, and an MDM subsystem.
  • threat mitigation process 10 may rank 510 the one or more non-deployed security-relevant subsystems (e.g., a CDN subsystem, a WAF subsystem, a DAM subsystem; a UBA subsystem; a API subsystem, and an MDM subsystem) based upon the anticipated use of the one or more non-deployed security relevant subsystems within computing platform 60.
  • a non-deployed security-relevant subsystem e.g., a CDN subsystem, a WAF subsystem, a DAM subsystem; a UBA subsystem; a API subsystem, and an MDM subsystem
  • This ranking 510 of the non- deployed security-relevant subsystems may be agnostic in nature and may be based on the functionality / effectiveness of the non- deployed security-relevant subsystems and the anticipated manner in which their implementation may impact the functionality / security of computing platform 60.
  • Threat mitigation process 10 may provide 512 the list of ranked & recommended security-relevant subsystems (e.g., non-deployed security-relevant subsystem list 550) to a third-party, examples of which may include but are not limited to a user / owner / operator of computing platform 60.
  • a third-party examples of which may include but are not limited to a user / owner / operator of computing platform 60.
  • threat mitigation process 10 may identify 514 a comparative for at least one of the non-deployed security-relevant subsystems (e.g., a CDN subsystem, a WAF subsystem, a DAM subsystem; a UBA subsystem; a API subsystem, and an MDM subsystem) defined within the list of ranked & recommended security-relevant subsystems (e.g., non-deployed security-relevant subsystem list 550).
  • This comparative may include vendor customers in a specific industry comparative and/or vendor customers in any industry comparative.
  • non-deployed security relevant subsystem list 550 may include columns 554, 556 for defining the comparatives for the six non-deployed security-relevant subsystems, namely: a CDN subsystem, a WAF subsystem, a DAM subsystem; a UBA subsystem; a API subsystem, and an MDM subsystem.
  • column 554 is shown to define comparatives concerning vendor customers that own the non-deployed security -relevant subsystems in a specific industry (i.e., the same industry as the user / owner / operator of computing platform 60).
  • column 556 is shown to define comparatives concerning vendor customers that own the non-deployed security-relevant subsystems in any industry (i.e., not necessarily the same industry as the user / owner / operator of computing platform 60). For example and concerning the comparatives of the WAF subsystem: 33% of the vendor customers in the same industry as the user / owner / operator of computing platform 60 deploy a WAF subsystem; while 71% of the vendor customers in any industry deploy a WAF subsystem.
  • non-deploy ed security relevant subsystem list 550 may be varied greatly depending upon the design criteria and anticipated performance / use of threat mitigation process 10. Accordingly, the appearance, format, completeness and content of non-deployed security-relevant subsystem list 550 is for illustrative purposes only and is not intended to be a limitation of this disclosure, as other configurations are possible and are considered to be within the scope of this disclosure. For example, content may be added to non-deployed security relevant subsystem list 550, removed from non-deployed security-relevant subsystem list 550, and/or reformatted within non-deployed security-relevant subsystem list 550.
  • threat mitigation process 10 may be configured to compare the current capabilities to the possible capabilities of computing platform 60.
  • threat mitigation process 10 may obtain 600 consolidated platform information to identify current security-relevant capabilities for computing platform 60.
  • This consolidated platform information may be obtained from an independent information source (e.g., such as SIEM system 230 that may provide system-defined consolidated platform information 236) and/or may be obtained from a client information source (e.g., such as questionnaires 240 that may provide client-defined consolidated platform information 238.
  • Threat mitigation process 10 may then determine 606 possible security-relevant capabilities for computing platform 60 (i.e., the difference between the current security-relevant capabilities of computing platform 60 and the possible security relevant capabilities of computing platform 60.
  • the possible security relevant capabilities may concern the possible security-relevant capabilities of computing platform 60 using the currently-deployed security-relevant subsystems. Additionally / alternatively, the possible security-relevant capabilities may concern the possible security-relevant capabilities of computing platform 60 using one or more supplemental security-relevant subsystems.
  • threat mitigation process 10 may generate 608 comparison information 650 that compares the current security-relevant capabilities of computing platform 60 to the possible security-relevant capabilities of computing platform 60 to identify security-relevant deficiencies.
  • Comparison information 650 may include graphical comparison information, such as multi-axial graphical comparison information that simultaneously illustrates a plurality of security-relevant deficiencies.
  • comparison information 650 may define (in this particular illustrative example) graphical comparison information that include five axes (e.g. axes 652, 654, 656, 658, 660) that correspond to five particular types of computer threats.
  • Comparison information 650 includes origin 662, the point at which computing platform 60 has no protection with respect to any of the five types of computer threats that correspond to axes 652, 654, 656, 658, 660. Accordingly, as the capabilities of computing platform 60 are increased to counter a particular type of computer threat, the data point along the corresponding axis is proportionately displaced from origin 652.
  • threat mitigation process 10 may obtain 600 consolidated platform information to identify current security-relevant capabilities for computing platform 60. Concerning such current security-relevant capabilities for computing platform 60, these current security-relevant capabilities are defined by data points 664, 666, 668, 670, 672, the combination of which define bounded area 674. Bounded area 674 (in this example) defines the current security-relevant capabilities of computing platform 60.
  • threat mitigation process 10 may determine 606 possible security-relevant capabilities for computing platform 60 (i.e., the difference between the current security-relevant capabilities of computing platform 60 and the possible security-relevant capabilities of computing platform 60.
  • the possible security-relevant capabilities may concern the possible security-relevant capabilities of computing platform 60 using the currently-deployed security-relevant subsystems.
  • the currently-deployed security relevant subsystems are not currently being utilized to their full potential. Accordingly, certain currently-deployed security relevant subsystems may have certain features that are available but are not utilized and/or disabled. Further, certain currently-deployed security relevant subsystems may have expanded features available if additional licensing fees are paid.
  • data points 676, 678, 680, 682, 684 may define bounded area 686 (which represents the full capabilities of the currently-deployed security relevant subsystems within computing platform 60).
  • the possible security-relevant capabilities may concern the possible security-relevant capabilities of computing platform 60 using one or more supplemental security-relevant subsystems.
  • supplemental security-relevant subsystems are available for the deployment within computing platform 60. Therefore and concerning such possible security-relevant capabilities of computing platform 60 using such supplemental security-relevant subsystems, data points 688, 690, 692, 694, 696 may define bounded area 698 (which represents the total capabilities of computing platform 60 when utilizing the full capabilities of the currently-deployed security-relevant subsystems and any supplemental security-relevant subsystems).
  • comparison information 650 may be varied greatly depending upon the design criteria and anticipated performance / use of threat mitigation process 10. Accordingly, the appearance, format, completeness and content of comparison information 650 is for illustrative purposes only and is not intended to be a limitation of this disclosure, as other configurations are possible and are considered to be within the scope of this disclosure. For example, content may be added to comparison information 650, removed from comparison information 650, and/or reformatted within comparison information 650.
  • threat mitigation process 10 may be configured to generate a threat context score for computing platform 60.
  • threat mitigation process 10 may obtain 600 consolidated platform information to identify current security-relevant capabilities for computing platform 60.
  • This consolidated platform information may be obtained from an independent information source (e.g., such as SIEM system 230 that may provide system-defined consolidated platform information 236) and/or may be obtained from a client information source (e.g., such as questionnaires 240 that may provide client-defined consolidated platform information 238.
  • an independent information source e.g., such as SIEM system 230 that may provide system-defined consolidated platform information 236
  • client information source e.g., such as questionnaires 240 that may provide client-defined consolidated platform information 238.
  • threat mitigation process 10 may determine 700 comparative platform information that identifies security-relevant capabilities for a comparative platform, wherein this comparative platform information may concern vendor customers in a specific industry (i.e., the same industry as the user / owner / operator of computing platform 60) and/or vendor customers in any industry (i.e., not necessarily the same industry as the user / owner / operator of computing platform 60).
  • threat mitigation process 10 may generate 702 comparison information 750 that compares the current security-relevant capabilities of computing platform 60 to the comparative platform information determined 700 for the comparative platform to identify a threat context indicator for computing platform 60, wherein comparison information 750 may include graphical comparison information 752.
  • Graphical comparison information 752 may identify one or more of: a current threat context score 754 for a client (e.g., the user / owner / operator of computing platform 60); a maximum possible threat context score 756 for the client (e.g., the user / owner / operator of computing platform 60); a threat context score 758 for one or more vendor customers in a specific industry (i.e., the same industry as the user / owner / operator of computing platform 60); and a threat context score 760 for one or more vendor customers in any industry (i.e., not necessarily the same industry as the user / owner / operator of computing platform 60).
  • comparison information 750 may be varied greatly depending upon the design criteria and anticipated performance / use of threat mitigation process 10. Accordingly, the appearance, format, completeness and content of comparison information 750 is for illustrative purposes only and is not intended to be a limitation of this disclosure, as other configurations are possible and are considered to be within the scope of this disclosure. For example, content may be added to comparison information 750, removed from comparison information 750, and/or reformatted within comparison information 750.
  • threat mitigation process 10 may be configured to e.g., monitor the operation and performance of computing platform 60.
  • threat mitigation process 10 may be configured to monitor the health of computing platform 60 and provide feedback to a third-party concerning the same.
  • Threat mitigation process 10 may obtain 800 hardware performance information 244 concerning hardware (e.g., server computers, desktop computers, laptop computers, switches, firewalls, routers, gateways, WAPs, and NASs), deployed within computing platform 60.
  • Hardware performance information 244 may concern the operation and/or functionality of one or more hardware systems (e.g., server computers, desktop computers, laptop computers, switches, firewalls, routers, gateways, WAPs, and NASs) deployed within computing platform 60.
  • Threat mitigation process 10 may obtain 802 platform performance information 246 concerning the operation of computing platform 60.
  • Platform performance information 246 may concern the operation and/or functionality of computing platform 60.
  • threat mitigation process 10 may (as discussed above): obtain 400 system-defined consolidated platform information 236 for computing platform 60 from an independent information source (e.g., SIEM system 230); obtain 312 client-defined consolidated platform information 238 for computing platform 60 from a client information (e.g., questionnaires 240); and present 450 differential consolidated platform information 352 for computing platform 60 to a third- party, examples of which may include but are not limited to the user / owner / operator of computing platform 60.
  • an independent information source e.g., SIEM system 230
  • client information e.g., questionnaires 240
  • present 450 differential consolidated platform information 352 for computing platform 60 may include but are not limited to the user / owner / operator of computing platform 60.
  • threat mitigation process 10 may (as discussed above): obtain 500 consolidated platform information for computing platform 60 to identify one or more deployed security-relevant subsystems 226 (e.g., CDN (i.e., Content Delivery Network) systems; DAM (i.e., Database Activity Monitoring) systems; UBA (i.e., User Behavior Analytics) systems; MDM (i.e., Mobile Device Management) systems; IAM (i.e., Identity and Access Management) systems; DNS (i.e., Domain Name Server) systems, antivirus systems, operating systems, data lakes; data logs; security relevant software applications; security-relevant hardware systems; and resources external to the computing platform); process 506 the consolidated platform information (e.g., system-defined consolidated platform information 236 and/or client-defined consolidated platform information 238) to identify one or more non-deploy ed security relevant subsystems (within computing platform 60); generate 508 a list of ranked & recommended security-relevant subsystem
  • CDN i.e., Content Delivery Network
  • DAM i
  • threat mitigation process 10 may (as discussed above): obtain 600 consolidated platform information to identify current security-relevant capabilities for the computing platform; determine 606 possible security-relevant capabilities for computing platform 60; and generate 608 comparison information 650 that compares the current security-relevant capabilities of computing platform 60 to the possible security-relevant capabilities of computing platform 60 to identify security relevant deficiencies.
  • threat mitigation process 10 may (as discussed above): obtain 600 consolidated platform information to identify current security-relevant capabilities for computing platform 60; determine 700 comparative platform information that identifies security-relevant capabilities for a comparative platform; and generate 702 comparison information 750 that compares the current security-relevant capabilities of computing platform 60 to the comparative platform information determined 700 for the comparative platform to identify a threat context indicator for computing platform 60.
  • Threat mitigation process 10 may obtain 804 application performance information 248 concerning one or more applications (e.g., operating systems, user applications, security application, and utility application) deployed within computing platform 60.
  • Application performance information 248 may concern the operation and/or functionality of one or more software applications (e.g., operating systems, user applications, security application, and utility application) deployed within computing platform 60.
  • threat mitigation process 10 may generate 806 holistic platform report (e.g., holistic platform reports 850, 852) concerning computing platform 60 based, at least in part, upon hardware performance information 244, platform performance information 246 and application performance information 248.
  • Threat mitigation process 10 may be configured to receive e.g., hardware performance information 244, platform performance information 246 and application performance information 248 at regular intervals (e.g., continuously, every minute, every ten minutes, etc.).
  • holistic platform reports 850, 852 may include various pieces of content such as e.g., thought clouds that identity topics / issues with respect to computing platform 60, system logs that memorialize identified issues within computing platform 60, data sources providing information to computing system 60, and so on.
  • the holistic platform report (e.g., holistic platform reports 850, 852) may identify one or more known conditions concerning the computing platform; and threat mitigation process 10 may effectuate 808 one or more remedial operations concerning the one or more known conditions.
  • the holistic platform report (e.g., holistic platform reports 850, 852) identifies that computing platform 60 is under a DoS (i.e., Denial of Services) attack.
  • DoS attack a denial-of-service attack
  • Denial of service is typically accomplished by flooding the targeted machine or resource with superfluous requests in an attempt to overload systems and prevent some or all legitimate requests from being fulfilled.
  • threat mitigation process 10 may effectuate 808 one or more remedial operations.
  • threat mitigation process 10 may effectuate 808 e.g., a remedial operation that instructs WAF (i.e., Web Application Firewall) 212 to deny all incoming traffic from the identified attacker based upon e.g., protocols, ports or the originating IP addresses.
  • WAF Web Application Firewall
  • Threat mitigation process 10 may also provide 810 the holistic report (e.g., holistic platform reports 850, 852) to a third-party, examples of which may include but are not limited to a user / owner / operator of computing platform 60.
  • the holistic report e.g., holistic platform reports 850, 852
  • a third-party examples of which may include but are not limited to a user / owner / operator of computing platform 60.
  • the format, appearance and content of the holistic platform report may be varied greatly depending upon the design criteria and anticipated performance / use of threat mitigation process 10. Accordingly, the appearance, format, completeness and content of the holistic platform report (e.g., holistic platform reports 850, 852) is for illustrative purposes only and is not intended to be a limitation of this disclosure, as other configurations are possible and are considered to be within the scope of this disclosure.
  • content may be added to the holistic platform report (e.g., holistic platform reports 850, 852), removed from the holistic platform report (e.g., holistic platform reports 850, 852), and/or reformatted within the holistic platform report (e.g., holistic platform reports 850, 852).
  • holistic platform reports 850, 852 content may be added to the holistic platform report (e.g., holistic platform reports 850, 852), removed from the holistic platform report (e.g., holistic platform reports 850, 852), and/or reformatted within the holistic platform report (e.g., holistic platform reports 850, 852).
  • threat mitigation process 10 may be configured to monitor computing platform 60 for the occurrence of a security event and (in the event of such an occurrence) gather artifacts concerning the same.
  • threat mitigation process 10 may detect 900 a security event within computing platform 60 based upon identified suspect activity. Examples of such security events may include but are not limited to: DDoS events, DoS events, phishing events, spamming events, malware events, web attacks, and exploitation events.
  • threat mitigation process 10 may monitor 902 a plurality of sources to identify suspect activity within computing platform 60.
  • a security event e.g., DDoS events, DoS events, phishing events, spamming events, malware events, web attacks, and exploitation events
  • threat mitigation process 10 detects 900 a security event within computing platform 60.
  • threat mitigation process 10 is monitoring 902 a plurality of sources (e.g., the various log files maintained by SIEM system 230). And by monitoring 902 such sources, assume that threat mitigation process 10 detects 900 the receipt of inbound content (via an API) from a device having an IP address located in Uzbekistan; the subsequent opening of a port within WAF (i.e., Web Application Firewall) 212; and the streaming of content from a computing device within computing platform 60 through that recently-opened port in WAF (i.e., Web Application Firewall) 212 and to a device having an IP address located in Moldova.
  • WAF i.e., Web Application Firewall
  • threat mitigation process 10 may gather 904 artifacts (e.g., artifacts 250) concerning the above-described security event.
  • threat mitigation process 10 may gather 906 artifacts concerning the security event from a plurality of sources associated with the computing platform, wherein examples of such plurality of sources may include but are not limited to the various log files maintained by SIEM system 230, and the various log files directly maintained by the security-relevant subsystems.
  • threat mitigation process 10 may assign 908 a threat level to the above-described security event based, at least in part, upon the artifacts (e.g., artifacts 250) gathered 904. [00156] When assigning 908 a threat level to the above-described security event, threat mitigation process 10 may assign 910 a threat level using artificial intelligence / machine learning.
  • an initial probabilistic model may be defined, wherein this initial probabilistic model may be subsequently (e.g., iteratively or continuously) modified and revised, thus allowing the probabilistic models and the artificial intelligence systems (e.g., probabilistic process 56) to “learn” so that future probabilistic models may be more precise and may explain more complex data sets.
  • probabilistic process 56 may define an initial probabilistic model for accomplishing a defined task (e.g., the analyzing of information 58), wherein the probabilistic model may be utilized to go from initial observations about information 58 (e.g., as represented by the initial branches of a probabilistic model) to conclusions about information 58 (e.g., as represented by the leaves of a probabilistic model). Accordingly and through the use of probabilistic process 56, massive data sets concerning security events may be processed so that a probabilistic model may be defined (and subsequently revised) to assign 910 a threat level to the above-described security event.
  • threat mitigation process 10 may execute 912 a remedial action plan (e.., remedial action plan 252) based, at least in part, upon the assigned threat level.
  • a remedial action plan e.., remedial action plan 252
  • threat mitigation process 10 may allow 914 the above-described suspect activity to continue when e.g., threat mitigation process 10 assigns 908 a “low” threat level to the above- described security event (e.g., assuming that it is determined that the user of the local computing device is streaming video of his daughter’s graduation to his parents in Moldova).
  • threat mitigation process 10 may generate 916 a security event report (e.g., security event report 254) based, at least in part, upon the artifacts (e.g., artifacts 250) gathered 904; and provide 918 the security event report (e.g., security event report 254) to an analyst (e.g., analyst 256) for further review when e.g., threat mitigation process 10 assigns 908 a “moderate” threat level to the above-described security event (e.g., assuming that it is determined that while the streaming of the content is concerning, the content is low value and the recipient is not a known bad actor).
  • a security event report e.g., security event report 254
  • an analyst e.g., analyst 256
  • threat mitigation process 10 assigns 908 a “moderate” threat level to the above-described security event (e.g., assuming that it is determined that while the streaming of the content is concerning, the content is low value and the recipient is not a known bad actor).
  • threat mitigation process 10 may autonomously execute 920 a threat mitigation plan (shutting down the stream and closing the port) when e.g., threat mitigation process 10 assigns 908 a “severe” threat level to the above-described security event (e.g., assuming that it is determined that the streaming of the content is very concerning, as the content is high value and the recipient is a known bad actor).
  • threat mitigation process 10 may allow 922 a third-party (e.g., the user / owner / operator of computing platform 60) to manually search for artifacts within computing platform 60.
  • a third-party e.g., the user / owner / operator of computing platform 60
  • the third-party may be able to search the various information resources include within computing platform 60, examples of which may include but are not limited to the various log files maintained by SIEM system 230, and the various log files directly maintained by the security-relevant subsystems within computing platform 60.
  • threat mitigation process 10 may be configured to e.g., aggregate data sets and allow for unified search of those data sets.
  • threat mitigation process 10 may be configured to consolidate multiple separate and discrete data sets to form a single, aggregated data set. For example, threat mitigation process 10 may establish 950 connectivity with a plurality of security-relevant subsystems (e.g., security-relevant subsystems 226) within computing platform 60.
  • security-relevant subsystems e.g., security-relevant subsystems 22
  • security-relevant subsystems 226 may include but are not limited to: CDN (i.e., Content Delivery Network) systems; DAM (i.e., Database Activity Monitoring) systems; UBA (i.e., User Behavior Analytics) systems; MDM (i.e., Mobile Device Management) systems; IAM (i.e., Identity and Access Management) systems; DNS (i.e., Domain Name Server) systems, Antivirus systems, operating systems, data lakes; data logs; security-relevant software applications; security-relevant hardware systems; and resources external to the computing platform.
  • CDN i.e., Content Delivery Network
  • DAM i.e., Database Activity Monitoring
  • UBA i.e., User Behavior Analytics
  • MDM i.e., Mobile Device Management
  • IAM i.e., Identity and Access Management
  • DNS i.e., Domain Name Server
  • threat mitigation process 10 may utilize 952 at least one application program interface (e.g., API Gateway 224) to access at least one of the plurality of security relevant subsystems.
  • application program interface e.g., API Gateway 22
  • a 1 st API gateway may be utilized to access CDN (i.e., Content Delivery Network) system; a 2 nd API gateway may be utilized to access DAM (i.e., Database Activity Monitoring) system; a 3 rd API gateway may be utilized to access UBA (i.e., User Behavior Analytics) system; a 4 th API gateway may be utilized to access MDM (i.e., Mobile Device Management) system; a 5 th API gateway may be utilized to access IAM (i.e., Identity and Access Management) system; and a 6 th API gateway may be utilized to access DNS (i.e., Domain Name Server) system.
  • CDN i.e., Content Delivery Network
  • DAM i.e., Database Activity Monitoring
  • UBA i.e., User Behavior Analytics
  • MDM i.e., Mobile Device Management
  • IAM i.e., Identity and Access Management
  • DNS i.e., Domain Name Server
  • Threat mitigation process 10 may obtain 954 at least one security-relevant information set (e.g., a log file) from each of the plurality of security-relevant subsystems (e.g., CDN system; DAM system; UBA system; MDM system; IAM system; and DNS system), thus defining plurality of security -relevant information sets 258.
  • plurality of security-relevant information sets 258 may utilize a plurality of different formats and/or a plurality of different nomenclatures.
  • threat mitigation process 10 may combine 956 plurality of security -relevant information sets 258 to form an aggregated security -relevant information set 260 for computing platform
  • threat mitigation process 10 may homogenize 958 plurality of security -relevant information sets 258 to form aggregated security-relevant information set 260.
  • threat mitigation process 10 may process one or more of security -relevant information sets 258 so that they all have a common format, a common nomenclature, and/or a common structure.
  • threat mitigation process 10 may enable 960 a third-party (e.g., the user / owner / operator of computing platform 60) to access aggregated security relevant information set 260 and/or enable 962 a third-party (e.g., the user / owner / operator of computing platform 60) to search aggregated security-relevant information set 260.
  • a third-party e.g., the user / owner / operator of computing platform 60
  • 962 e.g., the user / owner / operator of computing platform 60
  • threat mitigation process 10 may be configured to enable the searching of multiple separate and discrete data sets using a single search operation. For example and as discussed above, threat mitigation process 10 may establish 950 connectivity with a plurality of security -relevant subsystems (e.., security relevant subsystems 226) within computing platform 60.
  • security-relevant subsystems 226 may include but are not limited to: CDN (i.e., Content Delivery Network) systems; DAM (i.e., Database Activity Monitoring) systems; UBA (i.e., User Behavior Analytics) systems; MDM (i.e., Mobile Device Management) systems; IAM (i.e., Identity and Access Management) systems; DNS (i.e., Domain Name Server) systems, Antivirus systems, operating systems, data lakes; data logs; security relevant software applications; security-relevant hardware systems; and resources external to the computing platform.
  • CDN i.e., Content Delivery Network
  • DAM i.e., Database Activity Monitoring
  • UBA i.e., User Behavior Analytics
  • MDM i.e., Mobile Device Management
  • IAM i.e., Identity and Access Management
  • DNS i.e., Domain Name Server
  • threat mitigation process 10 may utilize 952 at least one application program interface (e.g., API Gateway 224) to access at least one of the plurality of security relevant subsystems.
  • application program interface e.g., API Gateway 22
  • a 1 st API gateway may be utilized to access CDN (i.e., Content Delivery Network) system; a 2 nd API gateway may be utilized to access DAM (i.e., Database Activity Monitoring) system; a 3 rd API gateway may be utilized to access UBA (i.e., User Behavior Analytics) system; a 4 th API gateway may be utilized to access MDM (i.e., Mobile Device Management) system; a 5 th API gateway may be utilized to access IAM (i.e., Identity and Access Management) system; and a 6 th API gateway may be utilized to access DNS (i.e., Domain Name Server) system.
  • CDN i.e., Content Delivery Network
  • DAM i.e., Database Activity Monitoring
  • UBA i.e., User Behavior Analytics
  • MDM i.e., Mobile Device Management
  • IAM i.e., Identity and Access Management
  • DNS i.e., Domain Name Server
  • Threat mitigation process 10 may receive 1000 unified query 262 from a third-party (e.g., the user / owner / operator of computing platform 60) concerning the plurality of security-relevant subsystems.
  • security relevant subsystems 226 may include but are not limited to: CDN (i.e., Content Delivery Network) systems; DAM (i.e., Database Activity Monitoring) systems; UBA (i.e., User Behavior Analytics) systems; MDM (i.e., Mobile Device Management) systems; IAM (i.e., Identity and Access Management) systems; DNS (i.e., Domain Name Server) systems, Antivirus systems, operating systems, data lakes; data logs; security-relevant software applications; security-relevant hardware systems; and resources external to the computing platform.
  • CDN i.e., Content Delivery Network
  • DAM i.e., Database Activity Monitoring
  • UBA i.e., User Behavior Analytics
  • MDM i.e., Mobile Device Management
  • IAM i.e., Identity and Access Management
  • DNS
  • Threat mitigation process 10 may distribute 1002 at least a portion of unified query 262 to the plurality of security-relevant subsystems, resulting in the distribution of plurality of queries 264 to the plurality of security-relevant subsystems.
  • a third-party e.g., the user / owner / operator of computing platform 60
  • the third-party may formulate the appropriate unified query (e.g., unified query 262) that defines the employee name, the computing device(s) of the employee, and the date range of interest.
  • Unified query 262 may then be parsed to form plurality of queries 264, wherein a specific query (within plurality of queries 264) may be defined for each of the plurality of security-relevant subsystems and provided to the appropriate security-relevant subsystems.
  • a 1 st query may be included within plurality of queries 264 and provided to CDN (i.e., Content Delivery Network) system
  • a 2 nd query may be included within plurality of queries 264 and provided to DAM (i.e., Database Activity Monitoring) system
  • a 3 rd query may be included within plurality of queries 264 and provided to UBA (i.e., User Behavior Analytics) system
  • a 4 th query may be included within plurality of queries 264 and provided to MDM (i.e., Mobile Device Management) system
  • a 5 th query may be included within plurality of queries 264 and provided to IAM (i.e., Identity and Access Management) system
  • a 6 th query may be included within plurality of queries 264 and
  • Threat mitigation process 10 may effectuate 1004 at least a portion of unified query 262 on each of the plurality of security-relevant subsystems to generate plurality of result sets 266.
  • the 1 st query may be executed on CDN (i.e., Content Delivery Network) system to produce a 1 st result set
  • the 2 nd query may be executed on DAM (i.e., Database Activity Monitoring) system to produce a 2 nd result set
  • the 3 rd query may be executed on UBA (i.e., User Behavior Analytics) system to produce a 3 rd result set
  • the 4 th query may be executed on MDM (i.e., Mobile Device Management) system to produce a 4 th result set
  • the 5 th query may be executed on IAM (i.e., Identity and Access Management) system to produce a 5 th result set
  • the 6 th query may executed on DNS (i.e., Domain Name Server) system to produce a 6 th result set.
  • CDN i.e
  • Threat mitigation process 10 may receive 1006 plurality of result sets 266 from the plurality of security -relevant subsystems. Threat mitigation process 10 may then combine 1008 plurality of result sets 266 to form unified query result 268. When combining 1008 plurality of result sets 266 to form unified query result 268, threat mitigation process 10 may homogenize 1010 plurality of result sets 266 to form unified query result 268. For example, threat mitigation process 10 may process one or more discrete result sets included within plurality of result sets 266 so that the discrete result sets within plurality of result sets 266 all have a common format, a common nomenclature, and/or a common structure. Threat mitigation process 10 may then provide 1012 unified query result 268 to the third-party (e.g., the user / owner / operator of computing platform 60).
  • the third-party e.g., the user / owner / operator of computing platform 60.
  • threat mitigation process 10 may be configured to utilize artificial intelligence / machine learning to automatically consolidate multiple separate and discrete data sets to form a single, aggregated data set. For example and as discussed above, threat mitigation process 10 may establish 950 connectivity with a plurality of security-relevant subsystems (e.g., security-relevant subsystems 226) within computing platform 60.
  • security-relevant subsystems e.g., security-relevant subsystems 22
  • security-relevant subsystems 226 may include but are not limited to: CDN (i.e., Content Delivery Network) systems; DAM (i.e., Database Activity Monitoring) systems; UBA (i.e., User Behavior Analytics) systems; MDM (i.e., Mobile Device Management) systems; IAM (i.e., Identity and Access Management) systems; DNS (i.e., Domain Name Server) systems, Antivirus systems, operating systems, data lakes; data logs; security-relevant software applications; security-relevant hardware systems; and resources external to the computing platform.
  • CDN i.e., Content Delivery Network
  • DAM i.e., Database Activity Monitoring
  • UBA i.e., User Behavior Analytics
  • MDM i.e., Mobile Device Management
  • IAM i.e., Identity and Access Management
  • DNS i.e., Domain Name Server
  • threat mitigation process 10 may utilize 952 at least one application program interface (e.g., API Gateway 224) to access at least one of the plurality of security-relevant subsystems.
  • application program interface e.g., API Gateway 224.
  • a 1 st API gateway may be utilized to access CDN (i.e., Content Delivery Network) system; a 2 nd API gateway may be utilized to access DAM (i.e., Database Activity Monitoring) system; a 3 rd API gateway may be utilized to access UBA (i.e., User Behavior Analytics) system; a 4 th API gateway may be utilized to access MDM (i.e., Mobile Device Management) system; a 5 th API gateway may be utilized to access IAM (i.e., Identity and Access Management) system; and a 6 th API gateway may be utilized to access DNS (i.e., Domain Name Server) system.
  • CDN i.e., Content Delivery Network
  • DAM i.e., Database Activity Monitoring
  • UBA i.e., User Behavior Analytics
  • MDM i.e., Mobile Device Management
  • IAM i.e., Identity and Access Management
  • DNS i.e., Domain Name Server
  • threat mitigation process 10 may obtain 954 at least one security-relevant information set (e.g., a log file) from each of the plurality of security-relevant subsystems (e.g., CDN system; DAM system; UBA system; MDM system; IAM system; and DNS system), thus defining plurality of security-relevant information sets 258.
  • security-relevant information sets 258 may utilize a plurality of different formats and/or a plurality of different nomenclatures.
  • Threat mitigation process 10 may process 1050 plurality of security relevant information sets 258 using artificial learning / machine learning to identify one or more commonalities amongst plurality of security-relevant information sets 258.
  • an initial probabilistic model may be defined, wherein this initial probabilistic model may be subsequently (e.g., iteratively or continuously) modified and revised, thus allowing the probabilistic models and the artificial intelligence systems (e.g., probabilistic process 56) to “learn” so that future probabilistic models may be more precise and may explain more complex data sets.
  • probabilistic process 56 may define an initial probabilistic model for accomplishing a defined task (e.g., the analyzing of information 58), wherein the probabilistic model may be utilized to go from initial observations about information 58 (e.g., as represented by the initial branches of a probabilistic model) to conclusions about information 58 (e.g., as represented by the leaves of a probabilistic model).
  • plurality of security-relevant information sets 258 may be processed so that a probabilistic model may be defined (and subsequently revised) to identify one or more commonalities (e.g., common headers, common nomenclatures, common data ranges, common data types, common formats, etc.) amongst plurality of security-relevant information sets 258.
  • threat mitigation process 10 may utilize 1052 a decision tree (e.g., probabilistic model 100) based, at least in part, upon one or more previously-acquired security-relevant information sets.
  • a decision tree e.g., probabilistic model 100
  • Threat mitigation process 10 may combine 1054 plurality of security relevant information sets 258 to form aggregated security-relevant information set 260 for computing platform 60 based, at least in part, upon the one or more commonalities identified.
  • threat mitigation process 10 may homogenize 1056 plurality of security-relevant information sets 258 to form aggregated security-relevant information set 260.
  • threat mitigation process 10 may process one or more of security -relevant information sets 258 so that they all have a common format, a common nomenclature, and/or a common structure.
  • threat mitigation process 10 may enable 1058 a third-party (e.g., the user / owner / operator of computing platform 60) to access aggregated security relevant information set 260 and/or enable 1060 a third-party (e.g., the user / owner / operator of computing platform 60) to search aggregated security-relevant information set 260.
  • a third-party e.g., the user / owner / operator of computing platform 60
  • 1060 e.g., the user / owner / operator of computing platform 60
  • threat mitigation process 10 may be configured to be updated concerning threat event information.
  • threat mitigation process 10 may be configured to receive updated threat event information for security-relevant subsystems 226.
  • threat mitigation process 10 may receive 1100 updated threat event information 270 concerning computing platform 60, wherein updated threat event information 270 may define one or more of: updated threat listings; updated threat definitions; updated threat methodologies; updated threat sources; and updated threat strategies.
  • Threat mitigation process 10 may enable 1102 updated threat event information 270 for use with one or more security-relevant subsystems 226 within computing platform 60.
  • security-relevant subsystems 226 may include but are not limited to: CDN (i.e., Content Delivery Network) systems; DAM (i.e., Database Activity Monitoring) systems; UBA (i.e., User Behavior Analytics) systems; MDM (i.e., Mobile Device Management) systems; IAM (i.e., Identity and Access Management) systems; DNS (i.e., Domain Name Server) systems, Antivirus systems, operating systems, data lakes; data logs; security-relevant software applications; security-relevant hardware systems; and resources external to the computing platform.
  • CDN i.e., Content Delivery Network
  • DAM i.e., Database Activity Monitoring
  • UBA i.e., User Behavior Analytics
  • MDM i.e., Mobile Device Management
  • IAM i.e., Identity and Access Management
  • DNS i.e., Domain Name Server
  • threat mitigation process 10 may install 1104 updated threat event information 270 on one or more security-relevant subsystems 226 within computing platform 60.
  • Threat mitigation process 10 may retroactively apply 1106 updated threat event information 270 to previously-generated information associated with one or more security-relevant subsystems 226.
  • threat mitigation process 10 may: apply 1108 updated threat event information 270 to one or more previously-generated log files (not shown) associated with one or more security-relevant subsystems 226; apply 1110 updated threat event information 270 to one or more previously-generated data files (not shown) associated with one or more security -relevant subsystems 226; and apply 1112 updated threat event information 270 to one or more previously-generated application files (not shown) associated with one or more security-relevant subsystems 226.
  • threat mitigation process 10 may proactively apply 1114 updated threat event information 270 to newly-generated information associated with one or more security-relevant subsystems 226.
  • threat mitigation process 10 may: apply 1116 updated threat event information 270 to one or more newly-generated log files (not shown) associated with one or more security-relevant subsystems 226; apply 1118 updated threat event information 270 to one or more newly-generated data files (not shown) associated with one or more security relevant subsystems 226; and apply 1120 updated threat event information 270 to one or more newly-generated application files (not shown) associated with one or more security relevant subsystems 226.
  • threat mitigation process 10 may be configured to receive updated threat event information 270 for security-relevant subsystems 226.
  • threat mitigation process 10 may receive 1100 updated threat event information 270 concerning computing platform 60, wherein updated threat event information 270 may define one or more of: updated threat listings; updated threat definitions; updated threat methodologies; updated threat sources; and updated threat strategies.
  • threat mitigation process 10 may enable 1102 updated threat event information 270 for use with one or more security relevant subsystems 226 within computing platform 60.
  • security-relevant subsystems 226 may include but are not limited to: CDN (i.e., Content Delivery Network) systems; DAM (i.e., Database Activity Monitoring) systems; UBA (i.e., User Behavior Analytics) systems; MDM (i.e., Mobile Device Management) systems; IAM (i.e., Identity and Access Management) systems; DNS (i.e., Domain Name Server) systems, Antivirus systems, operating systems, data lakes; data logs; security relevant software applications; security-relevant hardware systems; and resources external to the computing platform.
  • CDN i.e., Content Delivery Network
  • DAM i.e., Database Activity Monitoring
  • UBA i.e., User Behavior Analytics
  • MDM i.e., Mobile Device Management
  • IAM i.e., Identity and Access Management
  • DNS i.e., Domain Name Server
  • threat mitigation process 10 may install 1104 updated threat event information 270 on one or more security-relevant subsystems 226 within computing platform 60.
  • threat mitigation process 10 may schedule 1150 the application of updated threat event information 270 to previously-generated information associated with one or more security-relevant subsystems 226.
  • threat mitigation process 10 may: schedule 1152 the application of updated threat event information 270 to one or more previously-generated log files (not shown) associated with one or more security-relevant subsystems 226; schedule 1154 the application of updated threat event information 270 to one or more previously-generated data files (not shown) associated with one or more security-relevant subsystems 226; and schedule 1156 the application of updated threat event information 270 to one or more previously-generated application files (not shown) associated with one or more security relevant subsystems 226. [00192] Additionally, / alternatively, threat mitigation process 10 may schedule 1158 the application of the updated threat event information to newly-generated information associated with the one or more security-relevant subsystems.
  • threat mitigation process 10 may: schedule 1160 the application of updated threat event information 270 to one or more newly-generated log files (not shown) associated with one or more security-relevant subsystems 226; schedule 1162 the application of updated threat event information 270 to one or more newly-generated data files (not shown) associated with one or more security-relevant subsystems 226; and schedule 1164 the application of updated threat event information 270 to one or more newly-generated application files (not shown) associated with one or more security relevant subsystems 226.
  • threat mitigation process 10 may be configured to initially display analytical data, which may then be manipulated / updated to include automation data.
  • threat mitigation process 10 may display 1200 initial security-relevant information 1250 that includes analytical information (e.g., thought cloud 1252).
  • analytical information e.g., thought cloud 1252
  • Examples of such analytical information may include but is not limited to one or more of: investigative information; and hunting information.
  • Investigative Information (a portion of analytical information): Unified searching and/or automated searching, such as e.g., a security event occurring and searches being performed to gather artifacts concerning that security event.
  • Threat mitigation process 10 may allow 1202 a third-party (e.g., the user / owner / operator of computing platform 60) to manipulate initial security-relevant information 1250 with automation information.
  • a third-party e.g., the user / owner / operator of computing platform 60
  • Automate Information (a portion of automation): The execution of a single (and possibly simple) action one time, such as the blocking an IP address from accessing computing platform 60 whenever such an attempt is made.
  • Orchestrate Information (a portion of automation): The execution of a more complex batch (or series) of tasks, such as sensing an unauthorized download via an API and a) shutting down the API, adding the requesting IP address to a blacklist, and closing any ports opened for the requestor.
  • threat mitigation process 10 may allow 1204 a third-party (e.g., the user / owner / operator of computing platform 60) to select the automation information to add to initial security-relevant information 1250 to generate revised security-relevant information 1250’.
  • threat mitigation process 10 may allow 1206 the third-party (e.g., the user / owner / operator of computing platform 60) to choose a specific type of automation information from a plurality of automation information types.
  • the third-party e.g., the user / owner / operator of computing platform 60
  • threat mitigation process 10 may render selectable options (e.g., selectable buttons 1254, 1256) that the third-party (e.g., the user / owner / operator of computing platform 60) may select to manipulate initial security-relevant information 1250 with automation information to generate revised security-relevant information 1250’.
  • the third-party e.g., the user / owner / operator of computing platform 60
  • threat mitigation process 10 may combine 1210 the automation information (that results from selecting “block IP” or “search”) and initial security-relevant information 1250 to generate and render 1212 revised security-relevant information 1250’.
  • threat mitigation process 10 may render 1214 revised security-relevant information 1250’ within interactive report 1258.
  • threat mitigation process 10 may be configured to allow for the manual or automatic generation of training routines, as well as the execution of the same.
  • threat mitigation process 10 may be configured to allow for the manual generation of testing routine 272.
  • threat mitigation process 10 may define 1300 training routine 272 for a specific attack (e.g., a Denial of Services attack) of computing platform 60.
  • threat mitigation process 10 may generate 1302 a simulation of the specific attack (e.g., a Denial of Services attack) by executing training routine 272 within a controlled test environment, an example of which may include but is not limited to virtual machine 274 executed on a computing device (e.g., computing device 12).
  • threat mitigation process 10 may render 1304 the simulation of the specific attack (e.g., a Denial of Services attack) on the controlled test environment (e.g., virtual machine 274).
  • Threat mitigation process 10 may allow 1306 a trainee (e.g., trainee 276) to view the simulation of the specific attack (e.g., a Denial of Services attack) and may allow 1308 the trainee (e.g., trainee 276) to provide a trainee response (e.g., trainee response 278) to the simulation of the specific attack (e.g., a Denial of Services attack).
  • a trainee e.g., trainee 276
  • a trainee response e.g., trainee response 278
  • threat mitigation process 10 may execute training routine 272, which trainee 276 may “watch” and provide trainee response 278.
  • Threat mitigation process 10 may then determine 1310 the effectiveness of trainee response 278, wherein determining 1310 the effectiveness of the trainee response may include threat mitigation process 10 assigning 1312 a grade (e.g., a letter grade or a number grade) to trainee response 278.
  • a grade e.g., a letter grade or a number grade
  • threat mitigation process 10 may be configured to allow for the automatic generation of testing routine 272.
  • threat mitigation process 10 may utilize 1350 artificial intelligence / machine learning to define training routine 272 for a specific attack (e.g., a Denial of Services attack) of computing platform 60.
  • an initial probabilistic model may be defined, wherein this initial probabilistic model may be subsequently (e.g., iteratively or continuously) modified and revised, thus allowing the probabilistic models and the artificial intelligence systems (e.g., probabilistic process 56) to “learn” so that future probabilistic models may be more precise and may explain more complex data sets.
  • probabilistic process 56 may define an initial probabilistic model for accomplishing a defined task (e.g., the analyzing of information 58), wherein the probabilistic model may be utilized to go from initial observations about information 58 (e.g., as represented by the initial branches of a probabilistic model) to conclusions about information 58 (e.g., as represented by the leaves of a probabilistic model). Accordingly and through the use of probabilistic process 56, information may be processed so that a probabilistic model may be defined (and subsequently revised) to define training routine 272 for a specific attack (e.g., a Denial of Services attack) of computing platform 60.
  • a specific attack e.g., a Denial of Services attack
  • threat mitigation process 10 may process 1352 security -relevant information to define training routine 272 for specific attack (e.g., a Denial of Services attack) of computing platform 60. Further and when using 1350 artificial intelligence / machine learning to define training routine 272 for a specific attack (e.g., a Denial of Services attack) of computing platform 60, threat mitigation process 10 may utilize 1354 security relevant rules to define training routine 272 for a specific attack (e.g., a Denial of Services attack) of computing platform 60.
  • security-relevant information that e.g., defines the symptoms of e.g., a Denial of Services attack and security-relevant rules that define the behavior of e.g., a Denial of Services attack may be utilized by threat mitigation process 10 when defining training routine 272.
  • threat mitigation process 10 may generate 1302 a simulation of the specific attack (e.g., a Denial of Services attack) by executing training routine 272 within a controlled test environment, an example of which may include but is not limited to virtual machine 274 executed on a computing device (e.g., computing device 12.
  • a simulation of the specific attack e.g., a Denial of Services attack
  • training routine 272 within a controlled test environment, an example of which may include but is not limited to virtual machine 274 executed on a computing device (e.g., computing device 12.
  • threat mitigation process 10 may render 1304 the simulation of the specific attack (e.g., a Denial of Services attack) on the controlled test environment (e.g., virtual machine 274).
  • Threat mitigation process 10 may allow 1306 a trainee (e.g., trainee 276) to view the simulation of the specific attack (e.g., a Denial of Services attack) and may allow 1308 the trainee (e.g., trainee 276) to provide a trainee response (e.g., trainee response 278) to the simulation of the specific attack (e.g., a Denial of Services attack).
  • a trainee e.g., trainee 276
  • a trainee response e.g., trainee response 278
  • threat mitigation process 10 may execute training routine 272, which trainee 276 may “watch” and provide trainee response 278.
  • Threat mitigation process 10 may utilize 1356 artificial intelligence / machine learning to revise training routine 272 for the specific attack (e.g., a Denial of Services attack) of computing platform 60 based, at least in part, upon trainee response 278.
  • specific attack e.g., a Denial of Services attack
  • threat mitigation process 10 may then determine 1310 the effectiveness of trainee response 278, wherein determining 1310 the effectiveness of the trainee response may include threat mitigation process 10 assigning 1312 a grade (e.g., a letter grade or a number grade) to trainee response 278.
  • a grade e.g., a letter grade or a number grade
  • threat mitigation process 10 may be configured to allow a trainee to choose their training routine.
  • mitigation process 10 may allow 1400 a third-party (e.g., the user / owner / operator of computing platform 60) to select a training routine for a specific attack (e.g., a Denial of Services attack) of computing platform 60, thus defining a selected training routine.
  • a third-party e.g., the user / owner / operator of computing platform 60
  • a specific attack e.g., a Denial of Services attack
  • threat mitigation process 10 may allow 1402 the third-party (e.g., the user / owner / operator of computing platform 60) to choose a specific training routine from a plurality of available training routines.
  • the third-party e.g., the user / owner / operator of computing platform 60
  • may be able to select a specific type of attack e.g., DDoS events, DoS events, phishing events, spamming events, malware events, web attacks, and exploitation events
  • a specific type of attack e.g., DDoS events, DoS events, phishing events, spamming events, malware events, web attacks, and exploitation events
  • a specific training routine that may or may not disclose the specific type of attack.
  • threat mitigation process 10 may analyze 1404 the requirements of the selected training routine (e.g., training routine 272) to determine a quantity of entities required to effectuate the selected training routine (e.g., training routine 272), thus defining one or more required entities. For example, assume that training routine 272 has three required entities (e.g., an attacked device and two attacking devices). According, threat mitigation process 10 may generate 1406 one or more virtual machines (e.g., such as virtual machine 274) to emulate the one or more required entities. In this particular example, threat mitigation process 10 may generate 1406 three virtual machines, a first VM for the attacked device, a second VM for the first attacking device and a third VM for the second attacking device.
  • virtual machines e.g., such as virtual machine 274
  • VM virtual machine
  • Virtual machines may be based on computer architectures and may provide the functionality of a physical computer, wherein their implementations may involve specialized hardware, software, or a combination thereof.
  • Threat mitigation process 10 may generate 1408 a simulation of the specific attack (e.g., a Denial of Services attack) by executing the selected training routine (e.g., training routine 272).
  • threat mitigation process 10 may render 1410 the simulation of the specific attack (e.g., a Denial of Services attack) by executing the selected training routine (e.g., training routine 272) within a controlled test environment (e.g., such as virtual machine 274).
  • threat mitigation process 10 may allow 1306 a trainee (e.g., trainee 276) to view the simulation of the specific attack (e.g., a Denial of Services attack) and may allow 1308 the trainee (e.g., trainee 276) to provide a trainee response (e.g., trainee response 278) to the simulation of the specific attack (e.g., a Denial of Services attack).
  • a trainee e.g., trainee 276
  • a trainee response e.g., trainee response 278
  • threat mitigation process 10 may execute training routine 272, which trainee 276 may “watch” and provide trainee response 278.
  • threat mitigation process 10 may then determine 1310 the effectiveness of trainee response 278, wherein determining 1310 the effectiveness of the trainee response may include threat mitigation process 10 assigning 1312 a grade (e.g., a letter grade or a number grade) to trainee response 278.
  • a grade e.g., a letter grade or a number grade
  • threat mitigation process 10 may cease 1412 the simulation of the specific attack (e.g., a Denial of Services attack), wherein ceasing 1412 the simulation of the specific attack (e.g., a Denial of Services attack) may include threat mitigation process 10 shutting down 1414 the one or more virtual machines (e.g., the first VM for the attacked device, the second VM for the first attacking device and the third VM for the second attacking device).
  • threat mitigation process 10 may be configured to route information based upon whether the information is more threat-pertinent or less threat-pertinent.
  • threat mitigation process 10 may be configured to route more threat-pertinent content in a specific manner.
  • threat mitigation process 10 may receive 1450 platform information (e.g., log files) from a plurality of security-relevant subsystems (e.g., security-relevant subsystems 226).
  • security-relevant subsystems 226 may include but are not limited to: CDN (i.e., Content Delivery Network) systems; DAM (i.e., Database Activity Monitoring) systems; UBA (i.e., User Behavior Analytics) systems; MDM (i.e., Mobile Device Management) systems; IAM (i.e., Identity and Access Management) systems; DNS (i.e., Domain Name Server) systems, Antivirus systems, operating systems, data lakes; data logs; security-relevant software applications; security-relevant hardware systems; and resources external to the computing platform.
  • CDN i.e., Content Delivery Network
  • DAM i.e., Database Activity Monitoring
  • UBA i.e., User Behavior Analytics
  • MDM i.e., Mobile Device Management
  • IAM i.e., Identity and Access Management
  • DNS i.e., Domain Name Server
  • Threat mitigation process 10 may process 1452 this platform information (e.g., log files) to generate processed platform information. And when processing 1452 this platform information (e.g., log files) to generate processed platform information, threat mitigation process 10 may: parse 1454 the platform information (e.g., log files) into a plurality of subcomponents (e.g., columns, rows, etc.) to allow for compensation of varying formats and/or nomenclature; enrich 1456 the platform information (e.g., log files) by including supplemental information from external information resources; and/or utilize 1458 artificial intelligence / machine learning (in the manner described above) to identify one or more patterns / trends within the platform information (e.g., log files).
  • the platform information e.g., log files
  • subcomponents e.g., columns, rows, etc.
  • Threat mitigation process 10 may identify 1460 more threat-pertinent content 280 included within the processed content, wherein identifying 1460 more threat- pertinent content 280 included within the processed content may include processing 1462 the processed content to identify actionable processed content that may be used by a threat analysis engine (e.g., SIEM system 230) for correlation purposes. Threat mitigation process 10 may route 1464 more threat-pertinent content 280 to this threat analysis engine (e.g., SIEM system 230).
  • a threat analysis engine e.g., SIEM system 230
  • threat mitigation process 10 may be configured to route less threat-pertinent content in a specific manner.
  • threat mitigation process 10 may receive 1450 platform information (e.g., log files) from a plurality of security-relevant subsystems (e.g., security-relevant subsystems 226).
  • security-relevant subsystems 226 may include but are not limited to: CDN (i.e., Content Delivery Network) systems; DAM (i.e., Database Activity Monitoring) systems; UBA (i.e., User Behavior Analytics) systems; MDM (i.e., Mobile Device Management) systems; IAM (i.e., Identity and Access Management) systems; DNS (i.e., Domain Name Server) systems, Antivirus systems, operating systems, data lakes; data logs; security-relevant software applications; security-relevant hardware systems; and resources external to the computing platform
  • CDN i.e., Content Delivery Network
  • DAM i.e., Database Activity Monitoring
  • UBA i.e., User Behavior Analytics
  • MDM i.e., Mobile Device Management
  • IAM i.e., Identity and Access Management
  • DNS i.e., Domain Name Server
  • threat mitigation process 10 may process 1452 this platform information (e.g., log files) to generate processed platform information. And when processing 1452 this platform information (e.g., log files) to generate processed platform information, threat mitigation process 10 may: parse 1454 the platform information (e.g., log files) into a plurality of subcomponents (e.g., columns, rows, etc.) to allow for compensation of varying formats and/or nomenclature; enrich 1456 the platform information (e.g., log files) by including supplemental information from external information resources; and/or utilize 1458 artificial intelligence / machine learning (in the manner described above) to identify one or more patterns / trends within the platform information (e.g., log files).
  • the platform information e.g., log files
  • subcomponents e.g., columns, rows, etc.
  • Threat mitigation process 10 may identify 1500 less threat-pertinent content 282 included within the processed content, wherein identifying 1500 less threat- pertinent content 282 included within the processed content may include processing 1502 the processed content to identify non-actionable processed content that is not usable by a threat analysis engine (e.g., SIEM system 230) for correlation purposes. Threat mitigation process 10 may route 1504 less threat-pertinent content 282 to a long term storage system (e.g., long term storage system 284). Further, threat mitigation process 10 may be configured to allow 1506 a third-party (e.g., the user / owner / operator of computing platform 60) to access and search long term storage system 284.
  • a third-party e.g., the user / owner / operator of computing platform 60
  • threat mitigation process 10 may be configured to automatically analyze a detected security event.
  • threat mitigation process 10 may be configured to automatically classify and investigate a detected security event. As discussed above and in response to a security event being detected, threat mitigation process 10 may obtain 1550 one or more artifacts (e.g., artifacts 250) concerning the detected security event. Examples of such a detected security event may include but are not limited to one or more of: access auditing; anomalies; authentication; denial of services; exploitation; malware; phishing; spamming; reconnaissance; and web attack.
  • artifacts 250 may be obtained 1550 from a plurality of sources associated with the computing platform, wherein examples of such plurality of sources may include but are not limited to the various log files maintained by SIEM system 230, and the various log files directly maintained by the security-relevant subsystems
  • Threat mitigation process 10 may obtain 1552 artifact information (e.g., artifact information 286) concerning the one or more artifacts (e.g., artifacts 250), wherein artifact information 286 may be obtained from information resources include within (or external to) computing platform 60.
  • artifact information 286 e.g., artifact information 286
  • artifact information 286 may be obtained from information resources include within (or external to) computing platform 60.
  • threat mitigation process 10 may obtain 1554 artifact information 286 concerning the one or more artifacts (e.g., artifacts 250) from one or more investigation resources (such as third-party resources that may e.g., provide information on known bad actors).
  • investigation resources such as third-party resources that may e.g., provide information on known bad actors.
  • threat mitigation process 10 may generate 1556 a conclusion (e.g., conclusion 288) concerning the detected security event (e.g., a Denial of Services attack) based, at least in part, upon the detected security event (e.g., a Denial of Services attack), the one or more artifacts (e.g., artifacts 250), and artifact information 286.
  • Threat mitigation process 10 may document 1558 the conclusion (e.g., conclusion 288), report 1560 the conclusion (e.g., conclusion 288) to a third-party (e.g., the user / owner / operator of computing platform 60).
  • threat mitigation process 10 may obtain 1562 supplemental artifacts and artifact information (if needed to further the investigation).
  • system is described above as being computer-implemented, this is for illustrative purposes only and is not intended to be a limitation of this disclosure, as other configurations are possible and are considered to be within the scope of this disclosure.
  • some or all of the above-described system may be implemented by a human being.
  • threat mitigation process 10 may be configured to e.g., analyze a monitored computing platform (e.g., computing platform 60) and provide information to third-parties concerning the same. Further and as discussed above, such a monitored computing platform (e.g., computing platform 60) may be a highly complex, multi-location computing system / network that may span multiple buildings / locations / countries.
  • the monitored computing platform (e.g., computing platform 60) is shown to include many discrete computing devices, examples of which may include but are not limited to: server computers (e.g., server computers 200, 202), desktop computers (e.g., desktop computer 204), and laptop computers (e.g., laptop computer 206), all of which may be coupled together via a network (e.g., network 208), such as an Ethernet network.
  • Computing platform 60 may be coupled to an external network (e.g., Internet 210) through WAF (i.e., Web Application Firewall) 212.
  • a wireless access point (e.g., WAP 214) may be configured to allow wireless devices (e.g., smartphone 216) to access computing platform 60.
  • Computing platform 60 may include various connectivity devices that enable the coupling of devices within computing platform 60, examples of which may include but are not limited to: switch 216, router 218 and gateway 220.
  • Computing platform 60 may also include various storage devices (e.g., NAS 222), as well as functionality (e.g., API Gateway 224) that allows software applications to gain access to one or more resources within computing platform 60.
  • NAS 222 storage devices
  • API Gateway 224 functionality that allows software applications to gain access to one or more resources within computing platform 60.
  • other technology e.g., security-relevant subsystems 226) may be deployed within computing platform 60 to monitor the operation of (and the activity within) computing platform 60.
  • security-relevant subsystems 226 may include but are not limited to: CDN (i.e., Content Delivery Network) systems; DAM (i.e., Database Activity Monitoring) systems; UBA (i.e., User Behavior Analytics) systems; MDM (i.e., Mobile Device Management) systems; IAM (i.e., Identity and Access Management) systems; DNS (i.e., Domain Name Server) systems, antivirus systems, operating systems, data lakes; data logs; security-relevant software applications; security-relevant hardware systems; and resources external to the computing platform.
  • Each of security-relevant subsystems 226 may monitor and log their activity with respect to computing platform 60, resulting in the generation of platform information 228.
  • platform information 228 associated with a client-defined MDM (i.e., Mobile Device Management) system may monitor and log the mobile devices that were allowed access to computing platform 60.
  • SEIM Security Information and Event Management
  • SIEM system 230 is an approach to security management that combines SIM (security information management) functionality and SEM (security event management) functionality into one security management system.
  • SIM security information management
  • SEM security event management
  • the underlying principles of a SIEM system is to aggregate relevant data from multiple sources, identify deviations from the norm and take appropriate action. For example, when a security event is detected, SIEM system 230 might log additional information, generate an alert and instruct other security controls to mitigate the security event.
  • SIEM system 230 may be configured to monitor and log the activity of security-relevant subsystems 226 (e.g., CDN (i.e., Content Delivery Network) systems; DAM (i.e., Database Activity Monitoring) systems; UBA (i.e., User Behavior Analytics) systems; MDM (i.e., Mobile Device Management) systems; IAM (i.e., Identity and Access Management) systems; DNS (i.e., Domain Name Server) systems, antivirus systems, operating systems, data lakes; data logs; security-relevant software applications; security-relevant hardware systems; and resources external to the computing platform).
  • CDN i.e., Content Delivery Network
  • DAM i.e., Database Activity Monitoring
  • UBA i.e., User Behavior Analytics
  • MDM i.e., Mobile Device Management
  • IAM i.e., Identity and Access Management
  • DNS i.e., Domain Name Server
  • threat mitigation process 10 may be highly- complex and may be installed onto computing platform 60 in various stages.
  • threat mitigation process 10 may include a plurality of threat detection capability modules (e.g., threat detection capability modules 290, FIG. 3), wherein these threat detections capability modules (e.g., threat detection capability modules 290) may include various discrete items, examples of which may include but are not limited to threat detection rules, threat detection applications / applets, threat detection routines, threat detection lists, threat detection definitions, software / hardware drivers, software / firmware updates, software patches, APIs, functionality modules, etc.
  • the installation of such threat detection capability modules may be similar to the installation of upgrades that are made to software platforms and/or similar to the staged installation of a software platform.
  • threat mitigation process 10 may define 1600 a threat mitigation platform (e.g., a specific installation of threat mitigation process 10) for a client (e.g., user / owner / operator of computing platform 60).
  • This threat mitigation platform e.g., a specific installation of threat mitigation process 10) may include a plurality of threat detection capability modules (e.g., threat detection capability modules 290).
  • threat detection capability modules e.g., threat detection capability modules 290
  • threat mitigation process 10 may define 1602 a rollout schedule (e.g., rollout schedule 1650) for at least a portion of the plurality of threat detection capability modules (e.g., threat detection capability modules 290).
  • This rollout schedule (e.g., rollout schedule 1650) may be a graphical rollout schedule and/or a text-based rollout schedule.
  • rollout schedule 1650 is shown to include text-based portion 1652 that defines the various rollout phases, text- based portion 1654 that defines rollout phase dates, and graphical timeline 1656 that shows the temporal positioning of the various threat detection capability modules (e.g., threat detection capability modules 290).
  • the rollout schedule (e.g., rollout schedule 1650) may define a date for each of the plurality of threat detection capability modules (e.g., threat detection capability modules 290) and may define a content for each of the plurality of threat detection capability modules (e.g., threat detection capability modules 290).
  • rollout schedule 1650 is shown to illustrate the following:
  • a first threat detection capability module e.g., threat detection capability module 1658 having been installed in March 2019, which brought the total rule count up to 80 rules;
  • a second threat detection capability module e.g., threat detection capability module 1660 having been installed in April 2019, which brought the total rule count up to 100 rules;
  • a third threat detection capability module e.g., threat detection capability module 1662
  • threat detection capability module 1662 to be installed in May 2019, which brought the total rule count up to 120 rules
  • a fourth threat detection capability module e.g., threat detection capability module 1664 to be installed in June 2019, which brought the total rule count up to 135 rules;
  • Threat mitigation process 10 may be configured to present 1604 the rollout schedule (e.g., rollout schedule 1650) to the client (e.g., user / owner / operator of computing platform 60).
  • the rollout schedule e.g., rollout schedule 1650
  • threat mitigation process 10 may provide 1606 the rollout schedule (e.g., rollout schedule 1650) to the client (e.g., user / owner / operator of computing platform 60) as a periodic platform status update.
  • threat mitigation process 10 may proactively provide 1606 the rollout schedule (e.g., rollout schedule 1650) to the client (e.g., user / owner / operator of computing platform 60) as e.g., a printed document, an electronic document and/or an email attachment that is part of a periodic report.
  • threat mitigation process 10 may provide 1608 the rollout schedule (e.g., rollout schedule 1650) to the client (e.g., user / owner / operator of computing platform 60) as an ad hoc platform status update.
  • threat mitigation process 10 may reactively provide 1608 the rollout schedule (e.g., rollout schedule 1650) to the client (e.g., user / owner / operator of computing platform 60) as e.g., a printed document, an electronic document and/or an email attachment in response to a request from the client (e.g., user / owner / operator of computing platform 60).
  • the rollout schedule e.g., rollout schedule 1650
  • threat mitigation process 10 may enable 1610 the client (e.g., user / owner / operator of computing platform 60) to view the rollout schedule (e.g., rollout schedule 1650) via a user interface.
  • threat mitigation process 10 may enable 1610 the client (e.g., user / owner / operator of computing platform 60) to view the rollout schedule (e.g., rollout schedule 1650) via a user interface accessible via a desktop computer (e.g., desktop computer 204, FIG. 3).
  • threat mitigation process 10 may be configured to provide information (e.g., to the client) concerning the efficacy of threat mitigation process 10 as it is currently installed and operating on the monitored computing platform (e.g., computing platform 60).
  • threat mitigation process 10 may obtain 1700 consolidated platform information to identify current security relevant capabilities for a computing platform (e.g., computing platform 60).
  • This consolidated platform information may be obtained from an independent information source (e.g., such as SIEM system 230 that may provide system-defined consolidated platform information 236) and/or may be obtained from a client information source (e.g., such as questionnaires 240 that may provide client-defined consolidated platform information 238.
  • an independent information source e.g., such as SIEM system 230 that may provide system-defined consolidated platform information 236
  • client information source e.g., such as questionnaires 240 that may provide client-defined consolidated platform information 238.
  • Threat mitigation process 10 may then determine 1702 possible security relevant capabilities for computing platform 60 (i.e., the difference between the current security-relevant capabilities of computing platform 60 and the possible security-relevant capabilities of computing platform 60.
  • the possible security-relevant capabilities may concern the possible security-relevant capabilities of computing platform 60 using the currently-deployed security-relevant subsystems. Additionally / alternatively, the possible security-relevant capabilities may concern the possible security-relevant capabilities of computing platform 60 using one or more supplemental security-relevant subsystems.
  • threat mitigation process 10 may render 1704 graphical comparison information (e.g., graphical comparison information 1750) that illustrates a difference between the current security-relevant capabilities of the computing platform (e.g., computing platform 60) and the possible security-relevant capabilities of the computing platform (e.g., computing platform 60).
  • graphical comparison information e.g., graphical comparison information 1750
  • Such graphical comparison information may identify security-relevant deficiencies of the computing platform (e.g., computing platform 60).
  • the graphical comparison information (e.g., graphical comparison information 1750) that illustrates a difference between the current security-relevant capabilities of the computing platform (e.g., computing platform 60) and the possible security-relevant capabilities of the computing platform (e.g., computing platform 60) may include: multi-axial comparison information that illustrates the difference between the current security-relevant capabilities of the computing platform (e.g., computing platform 60) and the possible security-relevant capabilities of the computing platform (e.g., computing platform 60).
  • multi-axial comparison information may define (in this particular illustrative example) graphical comparison information that include four axes (e.g. axes 1752, 1754, 1756, 1758) that correspond to four particular types of computer threats.
  • This multi-axial comparison information may include origin 1760, the point at which computing platform 60 has no protection with respect to any of the four types of computer threats that correspond to axes 1752, 1754, 1756, 1758. Accordingly, as the capabilities of computing platform 60 are increased to counter a particular type of computer threat, the data point along the corresponding axis is proportionately displaced from origin 1760.
  • threat mitigation process 10 may obtain 1700 consolidated platform information to identify current security-relevant capabilities for computing platform 60. Concerning such current security-relevant capabilities for computing platform 60, these current security-relevant capabilities are defined by data points 1762, 1764, 1766, 1768, the combination of which define bounded area 1770. Bounded area 1770 (in this example) defines the current security -relevant capabilities of computing platform 60.
  • threat mitigation process 10 may determine 1702 possible security-relevant capabilities for computing platform 60 (i.e., the difference between the current security-relevant capabilities of computing platform 60 and the possible security-relevant capabilities of computing platform 60.
  • the possible security-relevant capabilities may concern the possible security-relevant capabilities of computing platform 60 using the currently-deployed security-relevant subsystems.
  • the currently-deployed security relevant subsystems are not currently being utilized to their full potential. Accordingly, certain currently-deployed security relevant subsystems may have certain features that are available but are not utilized and/or disabled. Further, certain currently-deployed security relevant subsystems may have expanded features available if additional licensing fees are paid.
  • data points 1772, 1774, 1776, 1778 may define bounded area 1780 (which represents the full capabilities of the currently-deployed security relevant subsystems within computing platform 60).
  • the possible security-relevant capabilities may concern the possible security-relevant capabilities of computing platform 60 using one or more supplemental security-relevant subsystems.
  • supplemental security-relevant subsystems are available for the deployment within computing platform 60. Therefore and concerning such possible security-relevant capabilities of computing platform 60 using such supplemental security-relevant subsystems, data points 1782, 1784, 1786, 1788 may define bounded area 1780 (which represents the total capabilities of computing platform 60 when utilizing the full capabilities of the currently-deployed security-relevant subsystems and any supplemental security-relevant subsystems).
  • the format, appearance and content of the graphical comparison information may be varied greatly depending upon the design criteria and anticipated performance / use of threat mitigation process 10. Accordingly, the appearance, format, completeness and content of graphical comparison information 1750 is for illustrative purposes only and is not intended to be a limitation of this disclosure, as other configurations are possible and are considered to be within the scope of this disclosure. For example, content may be added to graphical comparison information 1750, removed from graphical comparison information 1750, and/or reformatted within graphical comparison information 1750.
  • the graphical comparison information (e.g., graphical comparison information 1750) that illustrates a difference between the current security-relevant capabilities of the computing platform (e.g., computing platform 60) and the possible security-relevant capabilities of the computing platform (e.g., computing platform 60) may include: level-of-confidence comparison information that illustrates the difference between the current security-relevant capabilities of the computing platform (e.g., computing platform 60) and the possible security-relevant capabilities of the computing platform (e.g., computing platform 60).
  • graphical comparison information 1750 may include various levels of confidences, such as: first level-of-confidence comparison information 1792 and second level-of-confidence comparison information 1794.
  • first level-of-confidence comparison information 1792 which defines 58.90% as the “Increase in Level of Confidence with Eligible Content not Deployed” (i.e., the possible security-relevant capabilities of computing platform 60 using the currently-deployed security-relevant subsystems).
  • 58.90% defines the increase in surface area between bounded area 1770 versus bounded area 1780.
  • second level-of-confidence comparison information 1794 which defines 173.97% as the “Increase in Level of Confidence with All Content not Deployed” (i.e., the possible security-relevant capabilities of computing platform 60 using one or more supplemental security-relevant subsystems).
  • 173.97% defines the increase in surface area between bounded area 1770 versus bounded area 1790.
  • threat mitigation process 10 may obtain 1700 consolidated platform information to identify current security relevant capabilities for a computing platform (e.g., computing platform 60).
  • This consolidated platform information may be obtained from an independent information source (e.g., such as SIEM system 230 that may provide system-defined consolidated platform information 236) and/or may be obtained from a client information source (e.g., such as questionnaires 240 that may provide client-defined consolidated platform information 238.
  • an independent information source e.g., such as SIEM system 230 that may provide system-defined consolidated platform information 236
  • client information source e.g., such as questionnaires 240 that may provide client-defined consolidated platform information 238.
  • threat mitigation process 10 may identify 1706 coverage gaps in the current security -relevant capabilities of the computing platform (e.g., computing platform 60), and provide 1708 one or more recommendations (e.g., recommendations 1796, 1798) concerning how to mitigate such coverage gaps.
  • recommendations e.g., recommendations 1796, 1798
  • threat mitigation process 10 may: identify 1710 a plurality of inefficiencies (e.g., as identified in recommendations 1796) in the computing platform (e.g., computing platform 60); and rank 1712 the plurality of inefficiencies (e.g., as identified in recommendations 1796) of the computing platform (e.g., computing platform 60) to enable a user (e.g., an administrator or security professional associated with computing platform 60) to make an informed decision concerning how to address the inefficiencies (e.g., as identified in recommendations 1796).
  • a user e.g., an administrator or security professional associated with computing platform 60
  • threat mitigation process 10 may: identify 1714 an underutilization (e.g., underutilization 1800) for a plurality of portions of the computing platform (e.g., computing platform 60), thus resulting in a plurality of underutilizations; and may estimate 1716 an efficiency increase for each of the plurality of portions of the computing platform (e.g., computing platform 60) that would be realized if each of the plurality of underutilizations were mitigated.
  • underutilization e.g., underutilization 1800
  • threat mitigation process 10 may identify 1714 a specific underutilization (e.g., underutilization 1800), wherein only 21% of the Windows OS systems operating within computing platform 60 are performing the above-described logging functionality (e.g., logging data for SIEM system 230).
  • Threat mitigation process 10 may estimate 1716 that an efficiency increase of 8% (concerning the detection of true positives) may be realized if 100% of the Windows OS systems operating within computing platform 60 are performing the above-described logging functionality.
  • Threat mitigation process 10 may rank underutilization 1800 as “Priority 1” to enable a user (e.g., an administrator or security professional associated with computing platform 60) to make an informed decision concerning how to address the underutilization (e.g., as identified in recommendations 1796), wherein such ranking may consider all of the above-described factors associated with (in this example) underutilization 1800.
  • threat mitigation process 10 may: identify 1718 a plurality of undeployed rules (e.g., as identified in recommendations 1798) that are deployable in the computing platform (e.g., computing platform 60); and rank 1720 the plurality of undeployed rules (e.g., as identified in recommendations 1798) that are deployable in the computing platform (e.g., computing platform 60) to enable a user (e.g., an administrator or security professional associated with computing platform 60) to make an informed decision concerning how to address the undeployed rules (e.g., as identified in recommendations 1798).
  • a user e.g., an administrator or security professional associated with computing platform 60
  • Each of the plurality of undeployed rules may be associated with a kill chain phase; may be assigned a severity level; and may be assigned a performance score that is based, at least in part, on the possible of false positives.
  • undeployed rule 1802 e.g., “Threat File Hash Detected” identified 1718 by threat mitigation process 10
  • undeployed rule 1802 is shown to have been assigned:
  • threat mitigation process 10 may assign a severity level of “C” for Critical, “H” for High, “M” for Medium, “L” for Low, and unassigned for when the severity level is variable;
  • this performance score may be indicative of the ability of undeployed rule 1802 to detect true positives while avoiding injecting noise (e.g., false positives) into the system;
  • threat mitigation process 10 may rank 1720 undeployed rule 1800 as “Priority 1” to enable a user (e.g., an administrator or security professional associated with computing platform 60) to make an informed decision concerning how to address the undeployed rules (e.g., as identified in recommendations 1798), wherein such ranking 1720 may consider all of the above-described factors associated with (in this example) undeployed rule 1802.
  • threat mitigation process 10 may be configured to monitor that manner in which a client reacts in response to being notified of a security event being detected within the monitored computing platform (e.g., computing platform 60).
  • a security event may include but are not limited to one or more of: access auditing; anomalies; authentication; denial of services; exploitation; malware; phishing; spamming; reconnaissance; and web attack.
  • threat mitigation process 10 may detect 1850 one or more security events within a computing platform (e.g., computing platform 60) of a client (e.g., user / owner / operator of computing platform 60). As discussed above, threat mitigation process 10 may be configured to monitor the health of computing platform 60 and provide feedback to a third-party concerning the same.
  • a computing platform e.g., computing platform 60
  • a client e.g., user / owner / operator of computing platform 60
  • threat mitigation process 10 may be configured to monitor the health of computing platform 60 and provide feedback to a third-party concerning the same.
  • threat mitigation process 10 detects 1850 one or more security events (e.g., access auditing; anomalies; authentication; denial of services; exploitation; malware; phishing; spamming; reconnaissance; and web attack) within a computing platform (e.g., computing platform 60) of a client (e.g., user / owner / operator of computing platform 60), threat mitigation process 10 may notify 1852 the client (e.g., user / owner / operator of computing platform 60) of the one or more security events within the computing platform (e.g., computing platform 60).
  • security events e.g., access auditing; anomalies; authentication; denial of services; exploitation; malware; phishing; spamming; reconnaissance; and web attack
  • threat mitigation process 10 may notify 1852 the client (e.g., user / owner / operator of computing platform 60) of the one or more security events within the computing platform (e.g., computing platform 60).
  • Threat mitigation process 10 may determine 1854 if the client (e.g., user / owner / operator of computing platform 60) responded to the one or more security events within the computing platform (e.g., computing platform 60). Specifically, threat mitigation process 10 may determine 1854 if the client (e.g., user / owner / operator of computing platform 60) responded to being notified 1852 about the security event(s) detected 1850 within the computing platform (e.g., computing platform 60). [00275] Referring also to FIG.
  • threat mitigation process 10 may provide 1856 a response report (e.g., response report 1900) to the client (e.g., user / owner / operator of computing platform 60) that quantifies client response performance based, at least in part, upon if the client (e.g., user / owner / operator of computing platform 60) responded to the one or more security events (e.g., access auditing; anomalies; authentication; denial of services; exploitation; malware; phishing; spamming; reconnaissance; and web attack) within the computing platform (e.g., computing platform 60).
  • security events e.g., access auditing; anomalies; authentication; denial of services; exploitation; malware; phishing; spamming; reconnaissance; and web attack
  • the response report may define a client response rate with respect to if the client (e.g., user / owner / operator of computing platform 60) responded to the one or more security events within the computing platform (e.g., computing platform 60).
  • response report 1900 is shown to define that the client (e.g., user / owner / operator of computing platform 60) failed to respond to 19% of the security event(s) that were detected 1850 within the computing platform (e.g., computing platform 60) and of which the client (e.g., user / owner / operator of computing platform 60) was notified 1852.
  • the client e.g., user / owner / operator of computing platform 60
  • the client may be deemed to have not responded in the event that threat mitigation process 10 has not been notified that the client (e.g., user / owner / operator of computing platform 60) has received and/or resolved the security event about which they have been notified 1852.
  • the response report may compare the client response rate to the response rate of third-parties, wherein these third-parties may include one or more of: other clients regardless of industry; and other clients in the same industry as the client (e.g., user / owner / operator of computing platform 60).
  • response report 1900 is shown to define that:
  • the response report may define time-based response performance (e.g., time-based response performance 1902) over a defined period of time.
  • This time-based response performance (e.g., time-based response performance 1902) may include time-based response performance for the client (e.g., user / owner / operator of computing platform 60) and for third-parties.
  • response report 1900 is shown to include time-based response performance 1902 for the client, other clients (regardless of industry) and other clients (in the same industry as the client) covering a period of four quarters 1904, 1906, 1908, 1910 (e.g., 2018 Q3, 2018 Q4, 2019 Q1 and 2019 Q2).
  • Response report 1900 may also include a customer index (e.g., customer index 1912), which (in general terms) is a sliding scale grade concerning the response performance of the client (e.g., user / owner / operator of computing platform 60) versus the response performance of the third-parties (e.g., other clients regardless of industry and other clients in the same industry as the client).
  • customer index 1912 e.g., customer index 1912
  • response report 1900 may be varied greatly depending upon the design criteria and anticipated performance / use of threat mitigation process 10. Accordingly, the appearance, format, completeness and content of response report 1900 is for illustrative purposes only and is not intended to be a limitation of this disclosure, as other configurations are possible and are considered to be within the scope of this disclosure. For example, content may be added to response report 1900, removed from response report 1900, and/or reformatted within response report 1900.
  • threat mitigation process 10 may be configured to monitor how quickly a client resolves a security event detected within the monitored computing platform (e.g., computing platform 60).
  • a security event detected within the monitored computing platform e.g., computing platform 60.
  • examples of such detected security events may include but are not limited to one or more of: access auditing; anomalies; authentication; denial of services; exploitation; malware; phishing; spamming; reconnaissance; and web attack.
  • threat mitigation process 10 may detect 1950 one or more security events within a computing platform (e.g., computing platform 60) of a client (e.g., user / owner / operator of computing platform 60). As discussed above, threat mitigation process 10 may be configured to monitor the health of computing platform 60 and provide feedback to a third-party concerning the same.
  • a computing platform e.g., computing platform 60
  • a client e.g., user / owner / operator of computing platform 60
  • threat mitigation process 10 may be configured to monitor the health of computing platform 60 and provide feedback to a third-party concerning the same.
  • threat mitigation process 10 may notify 1952 the client (e.g., user / owner / operator of computing platform 60) of the one or more security events within the computing platform (e.g., computing platform 60).
  • security events e.g., access auditing; anomalies; authentication; denial of services; exploitation; malware; phishing; spamming; reconnaissance; and web attack
  • threat mitigation process 10 may notify 1952 the client (e.g., user / owner / operator of computing platform 60) of the one or more security events within the computing platform (e.g., computing platform 60).
  • Threat mitigation process 10 may determine 1954 how long it took the client (e.g., user / owner / operator of computing platform 60) to resolve the one or more security events within the computing platform (e.g., computing platform 60). Specifically, threat mitigation process 10 may determine 1954 how long it took the client (e.g., user / owner / operator of computing platform 60) to resolve the security event(s) detected 1950 within computing platform 60 about which they were notified 1952
  • threat mitigation process 10 may provide 1956 a resolution report (e.g., resolution report 2000) to the client (e.g., user / owner / operator of computing platform 60) that quantifies client performance based, at least in part, upon how long it took the client (e.g., user / owner / operator of computing platform 60) to resolve the one or more security events within the computing platform (e.g., computing platform 60).
  • a resolution report e.g., resolution report 2000
  • resolution report 2000 is shown to define a client resolution time (e.g., a mean time) of 6 Days, 7 Hours with respect to how long it took the client (e.g., user / owner / operator of computing platform 60) to resolve the security event(s) that were detected 1950 within the computing platform (e.g., computing platform 60) and of which the client (e.g., user / owner / operator of computing platform 60) was notified 1952.
  • client resolution time e.g., a mean time
  • 6 Days, 7 Hours with respect to how long it took the client (e.g., user / owner / operator of computing platform 60) to resolve the security event(s) that were detected 1950 within the computing platform (e.g., computing platform 60) and of which the client (e.g., user / owner / operator of computing platform 60) was notified 1952.
  • the resolution report may compare the client resolution time to the resolution time of third-parties, wherein these third-parties may include one or more of: other clients regardless of industry; and other clients in the same industry as the client (e.g., user / owner / operator of computing platform 60).
  • resolution report 2000 is shown to define that:
  • the resolution report (e.g., resolution report 2000) may define time-based resolution performance (e.g., time-based response performance 2002) over a defined period of time.
  • This time-based resolution performance (e.g., time-based resolution performance 2002) may include time-based resolution performance for the client (e.g., user / owner / operator of computing platform 60) and for third-parties.
  • resolution report 2000 is shown to include time-based resolution performance 2002 for the client, other clients (regardless of industry) and other clients (in the same industry as the client) covering a period of four quarters 2004, 2006, 2008, 2010 (e.g., 2018 Q3, 2018 Q4, 2019 Q1 and 2019 Q2).
  • Resolution report 2000 may also include a customer index (e.g., customer index 2012), which (in general terms) is a sliding scale grade concerning the resolution performance of the client (e.g., user / owner / operator of computing platform 60) versus the resolution performance of the third-parties (e.g., other clients regardless of industry and other clients in the same industry as the client).
  • customer index 2012 e.g., customer index 2012
  • Resolution report 2000 may also include time-based resolution performance for the client (e.g., user / owner / operator of computing platform 60) sorted by severity. For example, resolution report 2000 is shown to define that the client (e.g., user / owner / operator of computing platform 60) had:
  • resolution report 2000 may be varied greatly depending upon the design criteria and anticipated performance / use of threat mitigation process 10. Accordingly, the appearance, format, completeness and content of resolution report 2000 is for illustrative purposes only and is not intended to be a limitation of this disclosure, as other configurations are possible and are considered to be within the scope of this disclosure. For example, content may be added to resolution report 2000, removed from resolution report 2000, and/or reformatted within resolution report 2000.
  • the present disclosure may be embodied as a method, a system, or a computer program product. Accordingly, the present disclosure may take the form of an entirely hardware embodiment, an entirely software embodiment (including firmware, resident software, micro-code, etc.) or an embodiment combining software and hardware aspects that may all generally be referred to herein as a “circuit,” “module” or “system.” Furthermore, the present disclosure may take the form of a computer program product on a computer-usable storage medium having computer-usable program code embodied in the medium.
  • the computer-usable or computer-readable medium may be, for example but not limited to, an electronic, magnetic, optical, electromagnetic, infrared, or semiconductor system, apparatus, device, or propagation medium. More specific examples (a non-exhaustive list) of the computer-readable medium may include the following: an electrical connection having one or more wires, a portable computer diskette, a hard disk, a random access memory (RAM), a read-only memory (ROM), an erasable programmable read-only memory (EPROM or Flash memory), an optical fiber, a portable compact disc read-only memory (CD-ROM), an optical storage device, a transmission media such as those supporting the Internet or an intranet, or a magnetic storage device.
  • the computer-usable or computer-readable medium may also be paper or another suitable medium upon which the program is printed, as the program can be electronically captured, via, for instance, optical scanning of the paper or other medium, then compiled, interpreted, or otherwise processed in a suitable manner, if necessary, and then stored in a computer memory.
  • a computer-usable or computer-readable medium may be any medium that can contain, store, communicate, propagate, or transport the program for use by or in connection with the instruction execution system, apparatus, or device.
  • the computer-usable medium may include a propagated data signal with the computer-usable program code embodied therewith, either in baseband or as part of a carrier wave.
  • the computer usable program code may be transmitted using any appropriate medium, including but not limited to the Internet, wireline, optical fiber cable, RF, etc.
  • Computer program code for carrying out operations of the present disclosure may be written in an object oriented programming language such as Java, Smalltalk, C++ or the like. However, the computer program code for carrying out operations of the present disclosure may also be written in conventional procedural programming languages, such as the "C" programming language or similar programming languages.
  • the program code may execute entirely on the user's computer, partly on the user's computer, as a stand-alone software package, partly on the user’s computer and partly on a remote computer or entirely on the remote computer or server. In the latter scenario, the remote computer may be connected to the user’s computer through a local area network / a wide area network / the Internet (e.g., network 14).
  • These computer program instructions may also be stored in a computer- readable memory that may direct a computer or other programmable data processing apparatus to function in a particular manner, such that the instructions stored in the computer-readable memory produce an article of manufacture including instruction means which implement the function/act specified in the flowchart and/or block diagram block or blocks.
  • the computer program instructions may also be loaded onto a computer or other programmable data processing apparatus to cause a series of operational steps to be performed on the computer or other programmable apparatus to produce a computer- implemented process such that the instructions which execute on the computer or other programmable apparatus provide steps for implementing the functions/acts specified in the flowchart and/or block diagram block or blocks.
  • each block in the flowchart or block diagrams may represent a module, segment, or portion of code, which comprises one or more executable instructions for implementing the specified logical function(s).
  • the functions noted in the block may occur out of the order noted in the figures. For example, two blocks shown in succession may, in fact, be executed substantially concurrently, or the blocks may sometimes be executed in the reverse order, depending upon the functionality involved.

Landscapes

  • Engineering & Computer Science (AREA)
  • Computer Security & Cryptography (AREA)
  • General Engineering & Computer Science (AREA)
  • Theoretical Computer Science (AREA)
  • Computer Hardware Design (AREA)
  • Computing Systems (AREA)
  • Signal Processing (AREA)
  • Computer Networks & Wireless Communication (AREA)
  • Physics & Mathematics (AREA)
  • Software Systems (AREA)
  • General Physics & Mathematics (AREA)
  • Business, Economics & Management (AREA)
  • Human Resources & Organizations (AREA)
  • Mathematical Physics (AREA)
  • Artificial Intelligence (AREA)
  • Data Mining & Analysis (AREA)
  • Evolutionary Computation (AREA)
  • Quality & Reliability (AREA)
  • Strategic Management (AREA)
  • Entrepreneurship & Innovation (AREA)
  • Development Economics (AREA)
  • Educational Administration (AREA)
  • Economics (AREA)
  • Computer Vision & Pattern Recognition (AREA)
  • Medical Informatics (AREA)
  • Computational Linguistics (AREA)
  • Mathematical Optimization (AREA)
  • Game Theory and Decision Science (AREA)
  • Pure & Applied Mathematics (AREA)
  • Marketing (AREA)
  • Operations Research (AREA)
  • Mathematical Analysis (AREA)
  • Tourism & Hospitality (AREA)
  • General Business, Economics & Management (AREA)
  • Computational Mathematics (AREA)
  • Algebra (AREA)
  • Probability & Statistics with Applications (AREA)
  • Information Transfer Between Computers (AREA)
  • Management, Administration, Business Operations System, And Electronic Commerce (AREA)

Abstract

L'invention concerne un procédé mis en œuvre par ordinateur, un produit programme d'ordinateur et un système informatique pour : obtenir des informations de plateforme consolidée pour identifier des capacités pertinentes de sécurité actuelles pour une plateforme informatique ; déterminer des capacités pertinentes de sécurité possibles pour la plateforme informatique ; et rendre des informations de comparaison graphique qui illustrent une différence entre les capacités pertinentes de sécurité actuelles de la plateforme informatique et les capacités pertinentes de sécurité possibles de la plateforme informatique.
EP20862766.1A 2019-09-09 2020-09-09 Système et procédé d'atténuation de menace Pending EP4028916A4 (fr)

Applications Claiming Priority (2)

Application Number Priority Date Filing Date Title
US201962897703P 2019-09-09 2019-09-09
PCT/US2020/049903 WO2021050519A1 (fr) 2019-09-09 2020-09-09 Système et procédé d'atténuation de menace

Publications (2)

Publication Number Publication Date
EP4028916A1 true EP4028916A1 (fr) 2022-07-20
EP4028916A4 EP4028916A4 (fr) 2023-09-27

Family

ID=74849385

Family Applications (5)

Application Number Title Priority Date Filing Date
EP20864221.5A Pending EP4028919A4 (fr) 2019-09-09 2020-09-09 Système et procédé d'atténuation de menace
EP20863784.3A Pending EP4028918A4 (fr) 2019-09-09 2020-09-09 Système et procédé d'atténuation de menace
EP20863548.2A Pending EP4028917A4 (fr) 2019-09-09 2020-09-09 Système et procédé d'atténuation de menace
EP20862682.0A Pending EP4028964A4 (fr) 2019-09-09 2020-09-09 Système et procédé d'atténuation de menace
EP20862766.1A Pending EP4028916A4 (fr) 2019-09-09 2020-09-09 Système et procédé d'atténuation de menace

Family Applications Before (4)

Application Number Title Priority Date Filing Date
EP20864221.5A Pending EP4028919A4 (fr) 2019-09-09 2020-09-09 Système et procédé d'atténuation de menace
EP20863784.3A Pending EP4028918A4 (fr) 2019-09-09 2020-09-09 Système et procédé d'atténuation de menace
EP20863548.2A Pending EP4028917A4 (fr) 2019-09-09 2020-09-09 Système et procédé d'atténuation de menace
EP20862682.0A Pending EP4028964A4 (fr) 2019-09-09 2020-09-09 Système et procédé d'atténuation de menace

Country Status (4)

Country Link
US (6) US11057419B2 (fr)
EP (5) EP4028919A4 (fr)
CA (5) CA3150293A1 (fr)
WO (5) WO2021050519A1 (fr)

Families Citing this family (4)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
EP4028919A4 (fr) 2019-09-09 2023-09-27 Reliaquest Holdings, LLC Système et procédé d'atténuation de menace
US12034755B2 (en) * 2021-03-18 2024-07-09 International Business Machines Corporation Computationally assessing and remediating security threats
WO2024044037A1 (fr) * 2022-08-26 2024-02-29 Stairwell, Inc. Évaluation de fichiers à l'aide d'un système basé sur des règles ou des caractéristiques pour la détection de motifs malveillants et/ou suspects
US20240291842A1 (en) * 2023-02-23 2024-08-29 Reliaquest Holdings, Llc Threat mitigation system and method

Family Cites Families (65)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
US20040003266A1 (en) 2000-09-22 2004-01-01 Patchlink Corporation Non-invasive automatic offsite patch fingerprinting and updating system and method
US20030028803A1 (en) 2001-05-18 2003-02-06 Bunker Nelson Waldo Network vulnerability assessment system and method
US7325252B2 (en) 2001-05-18 2008-01-29 Achilles Guard Inc. Network security testing
US20030056116A1 (en) 2001-05-18 2003-03-20 Bunker Nelson Waldo Reporter
US7343619B2 (en) * 2002-03-16 2008-03-11 Trustedflow Systems, Inc. Trusted flow and operation control method
US8087087B1 (en) 2002-06-06 2011-12-27 International Business Machines Corporation Management of computer security events across distributed systems
US8909926B2 (en) * 2002-10-21 2014-12-09 Rockwell Automation Technologies, Inc. System and methodology providing automation security analysis, validation, and learning in an industrial controller environment
US9781154B1 (en) * 2003-04-01 2017-10-03 Oracle International Corporation Systems and methods for supporting information security and sub-system operational protocol conformance
US7451488B2 (en) 2003-04-29 2008-11-11 Securify, Inc. Policy-based vulnerability assessment
US20070113272A2 (en) 2003-07-01 2007-05-17 Securityprofiling, Inc. Real-time vulnerability monitoring
US8528086B1 (en) * 2004-04-01 2013-09-03 Fireeye, Inc. System and method of detecting computer worms
US7310669B2 (en) 2005-01-19 2007-12-18 Lockdown Networks, Inc. Network appliance for vulnerability assessment auditing over multiple networks
US8935429B2 (en) 2006-12-19 2015-01-13 Vmware, Inc. Automatically determining which remote applications a user or group is entitled to access based on entitlement specifications and providing remote application access to the remote applications
US8332947B1 (en) 2006-06-27 2012-12-11 Symantec Corporation Security threat reporting in light of local security tools
US9860274B2 (en) 2006-09-13 2018-01-02 Sophos Limited Policy management
US20090002463A1 (en) 2007-06-29 2009-01-01 Jinquan Xu Perforated fluid flow device for printing system
US20090024663A1 (en) * 2007-07-19 2009-01-22 Mcgovern Mark D Techniques for Information Security Assessment
US20090216588A1 (en) 2008-02-25 2009-08-27 Brian Coyne Return on investment analyzer
US8499197B2 (en) 2010-11-15 2013-07-30 Microsoft Corporation Description language for identifying performance issues in event traces
US8776241B2 (en) 2011-08-29 2014-07-08 Kaspersky Lab Zao Automatic analysis of security related incidents in computer networks
EP2610776B1 (fr) * 2011-09-16 2019-08-21 Veracode, Inc. Analyse statique et comportementale automatisée au moyen d'un bac à sable à instruments et classification d'apprentissage machine pour sécurité mobile
US9710644B2 (en) 2012-02-01 2017-07-18 Servicenow, Inc. Techniques for sharing network security event information
US10185822B2 (en) * 2012-03-14 2019-01-22 Carbon Black, Inc. Systems and methods for tracking and recording events in a network of computing systems
US9392003B2 (en) 2012-08-23 2016-07-12 Raytheon Foreground Security, Inc. Internet security cyber threat reporting system and method
US9292688B2 (en) 2012-09-26 2016-03-22 Northrop Grumman Systems Corporation System and method for automated machine-learning, zero-day malware detection
US10069854B2 (en) 2012-11-17 2018-09-04 The Trustees Of Columbia University In The City Of New York Methods, systems and media for evaluating layered computer security products
US9369431B1 (en) 2013-02-07 2016-06-14 Infoblox Inc. Security device controller
US9225737B2 (en) 2013-03-15 2015-12-29 Shape Security, Inc. Detecting the introduction of alien content
US10075455B2 (en) 2014-12-26 2018-09-11 Fireeye, Inc. Zero-day rotating guest image profile
US20160196735A1 (en) 2015-01-03 2016-07-07 Adam Clayman Systems and Methods for Monitoring Health in a Shared Living Environment
US10230742B2 (en) 2015-01-30 2019-03-12 Anomali Incorporated Space and time efficient threat detection
US9710775B2 (en) 2015-04-22 2017-07-18 Wipro Limited System and method for optimizing risk during a software release
IN2015CH02758A (fr) 2015-06-01 2015-07-17 Wipro Ltd
US9942249B2 (en) 2015-07-22 2018-04-10 Bank Of America Corporation Phishing training tool
US9699205B2 (en) 2015-08-31 2017-07-04 Splunk Inc. Network security system
US9888024B2 (en) 2015-09-30 2018-02-06 Symantec Corporation Detection of security incidents with low confidence security events
EP3166279B1 (fr) 2015-11-03 2019-07-03 Juniper Networks, Inc. Système de sécurité intégré à optimisation de règle
US10033764B1 (en) 2015-11-16 2018-07-24 Symantec Corporation Systems and methods for providing supply-chain trust networks
AU2016367922B2 (en) 2015-12-11 2019-08-08 Servicenow, Inc. Computer network threat assessment
US9965633B2 (en) 2015-12-29 2018-05-08 Sap Se Using code similarities for improving auditing and fixing of SAST-discovered code vulnerabilities
WO2017136695A1 (fr) * 2016-02-05 2017-08-10 Defensestorm, Inc. Suivi de politique d'entreprise avec intégration d'incident de sécurité
US10341377B1 (en) * 2016-10-13 2019-07-02 Symantec Corporation Systems and methods for categorizing security incidents
US10205735B2 (en) 2017-01-30 2019-02-12 Splunk Inc. Graph-based network security threat detection across time and entities
US20190018729A1 (en) 2017-04-14 2019-01-17 Microsoft Technology Licensing, Llc Anomaly remediation using device analytics
US11082450B2 (en) 2017-04-21 2021-08-03 Raytheon Bbn Technologies Corp. User interface supporting an integrated decision engine for evolving defenses
US10652106B2 (en) 2017-04-24 2020-05-12 Servicenow, Inc. Installation and upgrade of visualizations for managed networks
US10904289B2 (en) 2017-04-30 2021-01-26 Splunk Inc. Enabling user definition of custom threat rules in a network security system
US11057417B2 (en) 2017-06-23 2021-07-06 Ido Ganor Enterprise cyber security risk management and resource planning
US10524130B2 (en) 2017-07-13 2019-12-31 Sophos Limited Threat index based WLAN security and quality of service
US10216621B1 (en) 2017-11-16 2019-02-26 Servicenow, Inc. Automated diagnostic testing of databases and configurations for performance analytics visualization software
US10684847B2 (en) 2017-11-27 2020-06-16 Salesforce.Com, Inc. Content deployment system having a proxy for continuously providing selected content items to a content publishing engine for integration into a specific release and methods for implementing the same
US10635822B2 (en) 2017-11-30 2020-04-28 Bank Of America Corporation Data integration system for triggering analysis of connection oscillations
US10614214B2 (en) * 2018-01-02 2020-04-07 Honeywell International Inc. Using machine learning to detect communication channel abnormalities in an ICS/IIoT application
US11707338B2 (en) 2018-01-30 2023-07-25 PAR Excellence Systems, Inc. Storage system including at least one container containing medical supplies
WO2019152505A1 (fr) 2018-01-31 2019-08-08 Sophos Limited Gestion d'admission de dispositifs non reconnus sur un réseau d'entreprise
US11477222B2 (en) * 2018-02-20 2022-10-18 Darktrace Holdings Limited Cyber threat defense system protecting email networks with machine learning models using a range of metadata from observed email communications
US11843628B2 (en) * 2018-02-20 2023-12-12 Darktrace Holdings Limited Cyber security appliance for an operational technology network
US11095673B2 (en) 2018-06-06 2021-08-17 Reliaquest Holdings, Llc Threat mitigation system and method
US11063967B2 (en) 2018-07-03 2021-07-13 The Boeing Company Network threat indicator extraction and response
US10764246B2 (en) 2018-08-14 2020-09-01 Didi Research America, Llc System and method for detecting generated domain
US11263544B2 (en) 2018-08-20 2022-03-01 Microsoft Technology Licensing, Llc Similarity based approach for clustering and accelerating multiple incidents investigation
US11265348B2 (en) 2019-01-14 2022-03-01 International Business Machines Corporation Ongoing and on-demand secure verification of audit compliance
EP4028919A4 (fr) 2019-09-09 2023-09-27 Reliaquest Holdings, LLC Système et procédé d'atténuation de menace
EP4111370A2 (fr) * 2020-02-28 2023-01-04 Darktrace Holdings Limited Traitement de flux de données différemment en fonction du niveau d'intérêt
US11170334B1 (en) 2020-09-18 2021-11-09 deepwatch, Inc. Systems and methods for security operations maturity assessment

Also Published As

Publication number Publication date
US20210075820A1 (en) 2021-03-11
EP4028917A1 (fr) 2022-07-20
CA3150293A1 (fr) 2021-03-18
US20210073389A1 (en) 2021-03-11
WO2021050525A1 (fr) 2021-03-18
US20210075818A1 (en) 2021-03-11
US20210075819A1 (en) 2021-03-11
CA3150285A1 (fr) 2021-03-18
EP4028918A4 (fr) 2023-09-27
EP4028964A4 (fr) 2023-09-27
WO2021050544A1 (fr) 2021-03-18
US11552983B2 (en) 2023-01-10
US20220353290A1 (en) 2022-11-03
WO2021050516A1 (fr) 2021-03-18
EP4028917A4 (fr) 2023-09-27
US11102235B2 (en) 2021-08-24
EP4028919A1 (fr) 2022-07-20
EP4028918A1 (fr) 2022-07-20
EP4028964A1 (fr) 2022-07-20
US11057419B2 (en) 2021-07-06
WO2021050539A1 (fr) 2021-03-18
EP4028916A4 (fr) 2023-09-27
CA3150288A1 (fr) 2021-03-18
CA3150280A1 (fr) 2021-03-18
WO2021050519A1 (fr) 2021-03-18
EP4028919A4 (fr) 2023-09-27
US20210073390A1 (en) 2021-03-11
US11297092B2 (en) 2022-04-05
CA3150278A1 (fr) 2021-03-18
US11411981B2 (en) 2022-08-09

Similar Documents

Publication Publication Date Title
US10848506B2 (en) Threat mitigation system and method
US11102235B2 (en) Threat mitigation system and method

Legal Events

Date Code Title Description
STAA Information on the status of an ep patent application or granted ep patent

Free format text: STATUS: THE INTERNATIONAL PUBLICATION HAS BEEN MADE

PUAI Public reference made under article 153(3) epc to a published international application that has entered the european phase

Free format text: ORIGINAL CODE: 0009012

STAA Information on the status of an ep patent application or granted ep patent

Free format text: STATUS: REQUEST FOR EXAMINATION WAS MADE

17P Request for examination filed

Effective date: 20220323

AK Designated contracting states

Kind code of ref document: A1

Designated state(s): AL AT BE BG CH CY CZ DE DK EE ES FI FR GB GR HR HU IE IS IT LI LT LU LV MC MK MT NL NO PL PT RO RS SE SI SK SM TR

DAV Request for validation of the european patent (deleted)
DAX Request for extension of the european patent (deleted)
REG Reference to a national code

Ref country code: HK

Ref legal event code: DE

Ref document number: 40077833

Country of ref document: HK

A4 Supplementary search report drawn up and despatched

Effective date: 20230830

RIC1 Information provided on ipc code assigned before grant

Ipc: G06Q 10/0635 20230101ALN20230824BHEP

Ipc: G06N 20/00 20190101ALN20230824BHEP

Ipc: G06F 11/34 20060101ALN20230824BHEP

Ipc: H04L 67/30 20220101ALI20230824BHEP

Ipc: G06Q 10/0639 20230101ALI20230824BHEP

Ipc: G06N 7/01 20230101ALI20230824BHEP

Ipc: H04L 9/40 20220101ALI20230824BHEP

Ipc: G06F 21/57 20130101ALI20230824BHEP

Ipc: G06F 8/60 20180101ALI20230824BHEP

Ipc: G06F 21/60 20130101ALI20230824BHEP

Ipc: G06F 21/54 20130101ALI20230824BHEP

Ipc: G06F 21/12 20130101ALI20230824BHEP

Ipc: G06F 21/55 20130101AFI20230824BHEP